this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2025
1122 points (99.6% liked)

Political Memes

6252 readers
2659 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

I think that making a whole new system would be the way: there are too many loopholes and inconsistencies with legacy economics and rules that are not fit for a UBIfied society.

The first thing is to write up a sort of Constitution, that lays out economic rights. After that, I think using an Universal Ranked Income would be key to having the best of socialism with a dash of highly controlled capitalism. That latter bit is used for guiding the pricing of goods and services, but socialism should define the income of people, plus their minimum and maximum wealth. Capitalism should be driven by the circumstances of the everyday person, not the other way around.

I am thinking there can be five or so central "Obligate" ranks, which determines the income of a person, but the default rank everyone has gives a number of benefits that they will always have access to. By ensuring the survival and wellbeing of everyone, the role of money itself transforms - it isn't for survival, but rather to upgrade a lifestyle. If money is optional, that means that workers can freely strike or protest.

Further, the problem of inflation can be addressed by making income brackets absolute. A waiter on the East Coast makes just as much as her male counterpart on the West Coast. Everyone within a job class gets the same income, no matter their personal skill or connections. Everyone can be subject to a $100,000 income cap from all combined sources, so it would be relatively easy to keep millionaires and the like from existing. By having everyone relatively equal in the economy, prices should naturally reflect reality.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I have a stupider solution. Let's get individual blue states to pass laws making it a serious felony for anyone with a net worth over 10,000x the median national income to set foot in state lines. It is literally a felony to have a net worth over a certain amount. Like, Elon Musk sets foot in California? Bam! Instant 20 year mandatory minimum prison sentence.

We'll get blue states to pass laws effectively banishing the billionaires from our lands, like cockroaches fleeing from the light!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

I wouldn't mind that being part of the solution. Far as I can tell, people who are too wealthy go insane. A very blunt method like yours has merit, especially if it were terminal.

That said, what I put forward is more about preventing the existence of bad bosses, political corruption, and so forth. We shouldn't just eliminate the wealthy, but also eradicate poverty and give people the means to live a full life. That would be key to preventing the shit that brought American society to this point. Americans cannot afford the time and education needed to have political agency, with unfettered Capitalism being the culprit.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Thank you, i appreciate your effort in compiling this post. I generally agree with you and will revert back to this post to help myself gain more insight into this topic.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

An idea that I didn't cover here, is the concept of an asset/wealth cap for corporations themselves. It could be based on how many employees they have, worth half of a rank's income. So a clerk adds $20,000 to a company's asset cap, while an head researcher grants $50k. I figure something like this would help a company's usefulness to society dictate how much money it can have stockpiled. We don't want any given organization to get too powerful.

Additionally, I am thinking corporations who don't need employees, but an increased cap, can sponsor income brackets. These can be given out in a lotto for workers that are being replaced by AI. This would allow society to transition into AI workflows, without disruption that can ruin people's lives.