4 ms·

Someone might say: We need taxes to pay for X. Well, sure. I get that. We should get that money through other means, not through a system where people work thei

by kiba 4y ago

Someone might say: We need taxes to pay for X. Well, sure. I get that. We should get that money through other means, not through a system where people work their entire lives to pay off a mortgage only to discover they will have to keep paying to "own" that home for the rest of their lives. Perhaps the distinction should be your residence vs. investment/rental property. Not sure. Haven't through it through much deeper than that. I think we should tax land, but not buildings. Land shouldn't be horded and should be distributed to folks who are best to make use of it for societal's benefit. The idea of building enough nest egg for retirement doesn't make sense to me, especially if we take the long term perspective. It only make sense because we age over time and thus get weaker and frail. If we were always healthy as a horse, then we would have periods in which we work for our living, but not permanent retirement.

Ebree 4y ago
the very idea of fixing anything with taxes is wrong primary role of land is to not have any civilized role, just supporting nature and thanks to nature humans (as they are naturally part of it), land under cities and any density populated areas is area of human civilization, but usually not humane civilization, people tend to fix human artificially created problems with artificially created solutions usually creating new problems later land shouldn't be hoarded if every national has his own piece of it guaranteed (only inheritable) then there is no legitimisation for hoarding more but the piece should be big enough to let person feed himself from it then the rest can be city land for lending by nation to companies and all the rest is the shared coowned land like forests for mushroom collecting, limited hunting or fishing If no corporation or foreigner can hoard your land you fixed most of the problem already we decide our health and lifespan with everyday choices at shop and choosing place of living, working and it's water, air and soil quality ofc some of us get born with a better starting point but that's what maintaining common standards is for saving in inflative currency is irrational itself retirement system is a lottery game to keep people focused on working and paying taxes only, schooling to make obedient workers and alimentary system is a divorce maker to break society into individual atoms it's to block any need to group spontaneously, plan own future yourself, organise organically and oppose actual system people use their things best for themselves never for societal benefit especially that there is no one universal definition of societal benefit if every person has own idea about it it means you would give big share to some individual(s) who would build their idea of societal benefit that could contradict majority's sense of their benefit and common benefit btw if you make it uncommon it by definition becomes non common but I still like your sense of need of meritocracy and helping those more capable - still most important part lacking here is keeping them bound with bottom of pyramid they come from and serve, sharing fruits if their skills so the bottom would proliferate yielding new exceptional units lifting everything up continuously.

by kiba 4y ago

Ebree 4y ago

the very idea of fixing anything with taxes is wrong primary role of land is to not have any civilized role, just supporting nature and thanks to nature humans (as they are naturally part of it), land under cities and any density populated areas is area of human civilization, but usually not humane civilization, people tend to fix human artificially created problems with artificially created solutions usually creating new problems later land shouldn't be hoarded if every national has his own piece of it guaranteed (only inheritable) then there is no legitimisation for hoarding more but the piece should be big enough to let person feed himself from it then the rest can be city land for lending by nation to companies and all the rest is the shared coowned land like forests for mushroom collecting, limited hunting or fishing If no corporation or foreigner can hoard your land you fixed most of the problem already we decide our health and lifespan with everyday choices at shop and choosing place of living, working and it's water, air and soil quality ofc some of us get born with a better starting point but that's what maintaining common standards is for saving in inflative currency is irrational itself retirement system is a lottery game to keep people focused on working and paying taxes only, schooling to make obedient workers and alimentary system is a divorce maker to break society into individual atoms it's to block any need to group spontaneously, plan own future yourself, organise organically and oppose actual system people use their things best for themselves never for societal benefit especially that there is no one universal definition of societal benefit if every person has own idea about it it means you would give big share to some individual(s) who would build their idea of societal benefit that could contradict majority's sense of their benefit and common benefit btw if you make it uncommon it by definition becomes non common but I still like your sense of need of meritocracy and helping those more capable - still most important part lacking here is keeping them bound with bottom of pyramid they come from and serve, sharing fruits if their skills so the bottom would proliferate yielding new exceptional units lifting everything up continuously.