|
Hard mode: You can't kill the rich. Glorious marxist revolution is also disabled. The topic of a growing imbalance of power towards the wealthy in most nations on earth keeps coming up in Canada Politics of all places, and there seems to be enough interest there to warrant it's own thread. So discuss, how do you remove power from an elite and incredibly wealthy minority without going full reign of terror? How do you avoid the formation of neo-monarchies when we have no laws against the children or spouses of former leaders being elected into the same office? Is it even possible to achieve a utopian class-homogeneity within the influence of capitalism? Why no killing? If you aren't thorough, you've just removed competition for the ones you leave alive (France, etc), and if you are very thorough there's still nothing stopping new ones from popping up in a few decades (Russia). No, just continually weeding out the nobility does nothing to resolve the situation. So what other options are there?
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 23:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 08:55 |
|
|
Maybe if we ask the ruling class REALLY nicely they'll understand why collectivizing their private property is just the right thing to do
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 23:46
|
|
|
Solution: A shitload of hard work, organizing, and increased amounts of money in politics. Our system isn't broken. The agents within the system are not the most representative of the nation on issues of policy. Fortunately, the system has mechanisms for self-correction built in and will remain stable far into the future. I do think its necessary to identify the dynamics which have reduced rates of class mobility over the lifecourse in America, and discuss specific policies that may be promoted to increase rates of capital accumulation through the lifespan. Killing is an unpoductive path with too many unpredictable side effects. Once you unleash the killing genie, its a countdown until you're devoured.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 23:46
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Solution: A shitload of hard work, organizing, and increased amounts of money in politics.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
hahaha you ruled out killing but didn't rule out genocide. forced sterilization is a form of genocide that isn't killing. i win the Class Toppler achievement easily
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Miltank posted:What role does increased money in politics play in fixing the our current wealth gap? The cost/benefit of social program spending does not favor increasing allocations in order to win elections until the average cost per race is several times current levels, at a minimum. Why raise taxes to spend money on social programs? Much easier to win election by taking more money to lower taxes and offsetting those cuts with elimination of social programs. Simply, support of those programs is not an effective method to lower the price per vote versus the marginal utility of increased fundraising ability from socially regressive policy positions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:The cost/benefit of social program spending does not favor increasing allocations in order to win elections until the average cost per race is several times current levels, at a minimum. So how does more money in politics ever lead to lower price per votes for populist policy? Specifically in a society where the wealth gap is as high as our own?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
Well there is always accelerationism then rebuilding from the ashes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
Become the world's richest man (and first trillionaire) and give everyone all the money,.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
Rime posted:Hard mode: You can't kill the rich. Glorious marxist revolution is also disabled. Life imprisonment is the next best option (even if it's not a very good one). All we'd have to do is release all non-violent drug offenders and replace them since we have such a fantastic private prison infrastructure available.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 00:34
|
|
|
Are we allowed to incapacitate the rich for an indeterminate amount of time?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
No private schools (stolen from Warren Buffett), randomized school assignment 50-80% Inheritance Tax I think that pretty much fixes it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 00:46
|
|
|
Miltank posted:So how does more money in politics ever lead to lower price per votes for populist policy? Specifically in a society where the wealth gap is as high as our own? Because every policy position has costs associated with it in terms of votes. More money in politics increasing return on populist policy positions which directly and visibly benefit lower classes. While these currently take the form of regressive tax structures, general demographic trends make those policies unsustainable: you can't cut taxes for someone who you've made tax exempt.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Because every policy position has costs associated with it in terms of votes. More money in politics increasing return on populist policy positions which directly and visibly benefit lower classes. While these currently take the form of regressive tax structures, general demographic trends make those policies unsustainable: you can't cut taxes for someone who you've made tax exempt. You are gonna have to spell it out for me. By more money in politics you are talking about money supporting populist policy? Where does that money come from and how could it compete with established sources of campaign revenue? What about demographic trends suggests that plutocratic policies are unsustainable? Current trends show that the ultra-wealthy will continue to amass their wealth at higher than market rates.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 01:18
|
|
|
I recommend kidnapping and slavery OP.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 01:32
|
|
|
Miltank posted:You are gonna have to spell it out for me. By more money in politics you are talking about money supporting populist policy? Where does that money come from and how could it compete with established sources of campaign revenue? What about demographic trends suggests that plutocratic policies are unsustainable? Current trends show that the ultra-wealthy will continue to amass their wealth at higher than market rates. It doesn't compete, it lowers the amount of capital a campaign is required to raise in order to be competitive. Increase of contribution limits incentivizes maintainance of a few, highly lucrative interests over a broad subset of general interests. More money, less individuals whom you need to please, more options for innovative policy positions which lower price per vote while also raising necessary capital to be competitive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 01:32
|
|
|
Miltank posted:You are gonna have to spell it out for me. By more money in politics you are talking about money supporting populist policy? Where does that money come from and how could it compete with established sources of campaign revenue? What about demographic trends suggests that plutocratic policies are unsustainable? Current trends show that the ultra-wealthy will continue to amass their wealth at higher than market rates. Read up on Lawrence Lessig if this top interests you. He has some interesting ideas on how to combat money in politics.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
100% death tax. Maybe the first 200,000 and one house is exempt.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 01:38
|
|
|
Foma posted:Read up on Lawrence Lessig if this top interests you. He has some interesting ideas on how to combat money in politics. He failed miserably in 2014, though. So maybe take what he has to say with a grain of salt.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
Foma posted:Read up on Lawrence Lessig if this top interests you. He has some interesting ideas on how to combat money in politics. Lessig wants less money in politics. I want more through official channels and less through unaccountable channels.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:100% death tax. Maybe the first 200,000 and one house is exempt. Estate taxes don't work, they'll just choose to distribute it pre-death either into a trust fund or individual accounts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 01:46
|
|
|
Trapping the rich in a crystal prison tumbling through space technically isn't killing them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 01:59
|
|
|
tatankatonk posted:Trapping the rich in a crystal prison tumbling through space technically isn't killing them. Neither is unilaterally revoking their US Passports when they're on yet another business-class flight abroad, and barring them from entry in perpetuity.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:02
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Neither is unilaterally revoking their US Passports when they're on yet another business-class flight abroad, and barring them from entry in perpetuity. Solution: Employ a plausibly deniable shell to do your travels for you. "What, me, go to Malta?! No, no, customs officer, that was my 3rd cousin Alfredo!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:06
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Solution: Employ a plausibly deniable shell to do your travels for you. "What, me, go to Malta?! No, no, customs officer, that was my 3rd cousin Alfredo!" Yeah, I'm sure the rich are just dying to find other people to go enjoy Paris for them. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Neither is unilaterally revoking their US Passports when they're on yet another business-class flight abroad, and barring them from entry in perpetuity. We could also make rich people wear some sort of star on their clothes, to indicate their status.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
on the left posted:We could also make rich people wear some sort of star on their clothes, to indicate their status. They already wear clothes that indicate their status, so that will not be necessary.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:13
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Yeah, I'm sure the rich are just dying to find other people to Fixed for you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:13
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Fixed for you. Going to Paris has a use value that sending an underling there will not get for you for any price.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Our system isn't broken. Correct! It's horrible effects are by design.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
HorseLord posted:Correct! It's horrible effects are by design. Correct! We've also improvised mechanisms to ameliorate those when sufficient expressions of popular will exist.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Correct! We've also improvised mechanisms to ameliorate those when sufficient expressions of popular will exist. You're afraid, aren't you, Rahm? I've found the one weakness the international jet-setters have: their love of frequent international travel. They're never going to be able to buy their way out of that one. They're going to want to go to the Bahamas, or to Paris, or to Moscow, just like all their other oligarch friends. And when they do, BAM! No way back. Their funds are forfeit, their companies nationalized, the lamentation of their children unheeded.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:They already wear clothes that indicate their status, so that will not be necessary. Problem: tech billionaires dress like homeless people
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
on the left posted:Problem: tech billionaires dress like homeless people Nope. They have their stubble be just the right level. It's a meticulous simulacrum of homelessness, but you can spot it a mile away (mostly because you can't smell them a mile away). I've seen enough Inc., Details, Fortune, and Wired covers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
Rime posted:Estate taxes don't work, they'll just choose to distribute it pre-death either into a trust fund or individual accounts. Estate taxes as written have horrible loopholes, but it isn't an unfixable problem (there is just no will, and forces fighting against closing them), if we are talking about fixing our system through fiat, it is a completely doable solution.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Correct! We've also improvised mechanisms to ameliorate those when sufficient expressions of popular will exist. go on lad, give us an example
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:31
|
|
|
Rime posted:Hard mode: You can't kill the rich. Glorious marxist revolution is also disabled. Total jubilee every 7 years, plus aggressive assertion of squatters rights. Just as the Bible commands.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:35
|
|
|
What if everyone was just nice to each other?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
I dunno, maybe we lobotomize them, then take their poo poo and spread it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 08:55 |
|
|
Rime posted:Hard mode: You can't kill the rich. Y'all are looking at it the wrong way around. Once you have killed all of the poor, everybody left is rich problem solved
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:53
|
|
