(this is a sarcastic post meant to highlight the absurdity of some of the “greater good” rhetoric we’ve been hearing, especially around leaving vulnerable populations like disabled people behind in case of revolution, basically accelerationism)

  • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    Personally, I like a hybrid system. You know the famous Laffer Curve? Laffer was a hack who just used it to justify tax cuts, but he did have a point. At a 0% tax rate and a 100% tax rate, the government is bringing in zero revenue. However, the shaped of the curve in between is unknown. He just arbitrarily assumed that wherever tax rates happened to be at, the optimal rate was lower. I say we actually study it and harness the principle.

    Personally, I like the idea of using this principle not just as a crank tool to justify tax cuts, but as a way to maximize redistributive spending. Figure out what tax rate allows you to have the absolute most generous social welfare system possible, and set your tax policies to that rate. I like the free market, but as a practical tool, not for its own sake. I want to keep the free market around…chained to a treadmill, set to the maximum speed possible that won’t cause it to die of exhaustion.

    • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      That curve is so stupid on so many levels, wow.

      But also, when we talk about socialism, we don’t mean “capitalism but we tax the rich”. A socialist society would not even need taxes, in the liberal sense. When the means of production are controlled democratically by the workers, by extending democracy from the political to the economic, who would you even tax, and who would the money go to?

      It’s a big problem that people have been so convinced that capitalism and liberal democracy are the only way to organize society. We can do better!