Then finally the 99% screwed people realize that this is where (crony) capitalism is supposed to end up in the long run.
Time for a forceful redistribution and system change. Can’t happen soon enough.
Time for a forceful redistribution and system change. Can’t happen soon enough.
Sadly revolutions have a really bad track record for the 99%. It may feel good in the short term but the people who end up assuming power are usually much worse.
OTOH fractional reserve banking and cronyism are really past their expiration dates. It'd be nice to stop kicking the can down the road - we have technological solutions now.
Similarly if you redistribute wealth - what's going to prevent it from becoming unequally distributed again? I'd imagine that a small subset of people would quickly game whatever system is devised and we're back at square one again.
Instead, a random representative sample of 1000 people is chosen from the population, for some congress, for a year. They rule during that time. Some rules cannot be overruled, like the 1 year limit, no way to game that. Additionally, all communication of the chosen ones must be recorded and public, without exceptions.
This basically eliminates corruption or the rise of a „ruling class“, and lobbyism has a much harder task.
I would also argue that this will result in much better overall decisions - they might lack some initial knowledge but that is more than offset by missing corruption and cronyism
The people doing the drafting, suggesting, and explaining won't have term limits and will have the real power. They'll also be the ones targeted by lobbyists.
You'll end up with is a floor show with the real decisions being made behind the scenes by people who are mostly not directly accountable.
Not unlike what we have now. Different, possibly better in some ways, and possibly worse in others.
A randomly assigned legislature sounds like a recipe to create an unaccountable bureaucracy of staffers and advisors 'guiding' the forced citizen through what must be done / can't be done legislatively. This is where the real power would lie - and frankly we are kind of there today. Most congresscritters spend 45% of their time campaigning, 45% of their time fundraising and 10% of their time looking damn cute. Staffers, lobbyists and think-tanks do most of the legislative work.
Sounds like the UK civil service in Yes, Minister / Yes, Prime Minister.
My sample is anecdotal at best, but the single instance in which I ended up in a position to witness a judgement and its rationale, the result was... laughably wrong. It was quickly overruled in appeal by the judges who actually know the law.
So... I'm not optimistic. Perhaps some AI could help, I guess? But that comes with lots of risks, too.
The redistribution shouldn't be a one-time event, but rather a persistently different approach to taxation, labor rights (unions!), welfare, etc.
We can see this working in a number of countries, especially the Nordics.
Of course, there will always be attacks on such a system, but such is life. Some battles need to be refought every two generations or so, that's just how humans work.
Norway doesn’t count because of its sovereign wealth fund.
How is it working in Sweden though? That country still has billionaires (IKEA founder, Minecraft’s notch).
I think it just doesn’t work in general. If you try to set up a new system to redistribute the wealth, the winners will be those in charge of the system.
You need incentives to work hard and it is a good idea to have strong differences in outcome, as long as you have mostly equal opportunity.
Otherwise you end up where all socialist experiments end up: in economical, social and humanitarian hell.
I mean hell, the whole BLM shindig petered out the nanosecond that it looked like the people with BLM signs in their yard might not get tackled by the first cop that see em'.
Now imagine how something with serious dollar signs attached would go(!!).
I mean hell, the whole BLM shindig petered out the nanosecond that it looked like the people with BLM signs in their yard might get to see someone walk down the street with an open container and not get tackled by the first cop that see em'.
Or you can travel with great public transport, for free. It’s not that I want more money, taken away from the rich, but the realization that everyone including me is much better off of everyone around also is taken care of. Strong public services are key.
Ontop of that, even more radical, companies should be run by the people working in it instead of shareholders siphoning out profits. Workers would never fire each other for more profits, or evade taxes that fund their neighborhood, or offshore their own jobs. Currently that might not be legal, that’s why it would need forceful redistribution.
Even on the simplest level: if you have free access to education/healthcare/… imagine how many brilliant people can try to become entrepreneurs or researchers instead of having to suffer two service jobs to provide their family. It’s statistics, that 60%+ of the population might include the next Einsteins, but are unnoticed and their potential wasted.
According to [1] 14.5% of all EU workers are self-employed (i.e.: they have their own business, as small as it may be) whereas only 6.6% are in the USA.
Entrepreneurs start companies that are meant to grow beyond themselves and aren't just a legal framework to provide their work.
Not to disparage anyone who's self-employed. I am too, but I wouldn't consider me an entrepreneur. I might become one, but that would mean changing my work setup.
I am fine with not every useless thing to exist and waste resources on that.
What the EU lacks is the Ivy->Startup pipeline and insider/investor networks with access to old and old-ish money. And also the relentlessly aggressive branding and self-promotion (and tolerance of scamming and grifting) that defines US hustle culture.
If you're not in or around those networks already your chances of success in the US are pretty slim.
https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/02_econ...
America is a great place to be rich. In Europe they tax you. But why should a millionaire care about healthcare for the poor or homeless shelters?
Anecdotally, I live in Europe and know plenty of entrepreneurs, albeit mostly either in the tech space or as incorporated side gigs.
Source: https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Economy/Micr...
I’d like people to not go bankrupt paying for medical bills. I’d like everybody to be confident they can afford their next meal.
The current system was forget in the furncace of extreme bravery and duty . A fledging nation was taking on the superpower of the time (UK). Every single founding father was taking direct personal risk to themselves and their families by declaring indeoendence.
The level of bravery needed for this is astonishing. The people doing this literally had no self-interest in doing so. What leaders can you find today with the same sense of duty that are able to negotiate this country into a better deal?
The answer is there arent any and anything new we put in place today will look like a disaster vs what we have now.
Its insane to discard a 250yr old system that has outlived 2 world wars and most competing systems, because some of its features have been gamed.
Instead, you make mods. (Term limits being one).More government.
Please explain the logic behind this. Surely the solution is smaller government, no lobbying or money in government at all?