3 ms·
First and foremost, are we talking about equality of opportunity, or equality of outcome? Secondly, addressing inequality of unevenness of the playing field th
by sova 5y ago
First and foremost, are we talking about equality of opportunity, or equality of outcome?
Secondly, addressing inequality of unevenness of the playing field through organizations or corporations is still at least one level removed from actual humans.
Milton Friedman proposed the Negative Income Tax, a gradual inclined ramp out of poverty similar to modern-day calls for UBI. I wrote about a possible variant called GPI (Guaranteed Progressive Income) here: https://satisologie.substack.com/p/guaranteed-progressive-income https://satisologie.substack.com/p/guaranteed-progressive-in...
Government mints money, government also collects taxes on minted money. We take this as a necessary truth, but is it not a little redundant? Some people question the effectiveness of taxation. I don't think the alternatives to taxation are explored much if at all. Maybe there are slim pickings as far as promising ideas in that direction go.
So your suggestion, if I understand it, is to tier businesses for tax purposes, similar to the idea of a progressive tax but for business entities? Yeah, we could do that, would that alter outcomes somehow? It seems like education is the main barrier, and the more people are aware of interdependence the more intelligent our buying and funding decisions will be.
I advocate for a documented progeny for where raw materials and produce come from. If one could see a latitude and longitude for where an apple came from before one bought it, or the conditions that led to its being harvested, then one would be able to make more resource-friendly decisions at the point of purchase.
However, I think that we are talking about altering human behavior to make things less toxic and more harmonious on our planet, yet the basic necessities of hunger, thirst, shelter, clothing, and medicine are somewhat immutable in the large-scale, and therefore our focus ought be to address these inflexible (inelastic) demands as a matter of priority, then everything else will fall into place.
- unexaminedlife 5y agoI kind of feel like our focus historically has been around equality of opportunity. That (to me) feels like, at least partially, the wrong way to look at it. Unless science comes to the conclusion that there is in fact some super human species then equality of outcome should already be happening if equality of opportunity is truly already happening. I like your ideas. I'm not that familiar but thank you for pointing me to these things. I will look into them. I agree that education is an important barrier, but the people who need that education spend all of their time trying to make ends meet. They probably ultimately fall out of love with the idea that anything in their life is destined to change. Also, just to mention, I think you understood my premise. Taking government out as the middle man on at least some of the responsibility for wealth (re)distribution.