I've had an idea similar to this, though in a discussion in another thread I made I thought about it a little more and made some adjustments. Basically, here's what i'm saying. People shouldn't look at the soviet union and say "see, they've tried communism, it didn't work!" or look at any other form of government that hasn't worked and say "see, they've tried it, no need to try it again." Socialism/communism is all about equality and getting rid of the poor and starving. I don't see how anyone could view that as a bad thing. So, rather than say "socialism doesn't work. It's been tried, no need to try again" we should say, it hasn't worked in the past, what changes can we make so that it will work. Here's a cool idea that I thought of. This is assuming that we can't do any true communism/socialism because it won't work right now. that's the assumption. So, what's a way we can achieve the same goals in a new and unique way that hasn't been tried before. Well i've thought about it, and what about this. First of all, the job market and everything would be basically how it is now. People start businesses if they're qualified and think they can do a good job, they hire who they want, etc. The job market is basically how it is now. However, rather than your job determining your wage, how well you perform in your job determines your wage. Here's an example. EVERYONE would make $50,000 a year.(of course, the actual figures would have to be mathematically determined as to what would be most effective). So if you don't want to work or do anything, fine, take your $50,000 and be unproductive. Having a job leads to getting more money, however. There could be 3(in this example. realistically there could be as many as we decided was the best amount) levels of job performance. Below adequate, adequate, and exceeds expectations. For having a job, but performing below par, you make $25,000, of course in addition to the base $50,000. For having a job, and doing what's expected of you, you earn $50,000. For going above and beyond, you earn $75,000. Remember, all this time you could be fired or anything just like you could in the current situation. What does this result in? No poverty. EVERYONE is making at least that baseline $50,000. No lack of productivity. People have jobs just like they do now, and hey they may even work harder than they do now cuz if they do that means more money, as opposed to now where you get paid the same regardless of how hard you work, as long as you don't get fired.. That right there gets rid of the arguments against. Another key to this would be democracy. I think democracy is a good thing, seeing as how it stops whoever is in control from becoming corrupt. If he starts to become corrupt, elect a new official. Simple enough. anyways, that's my idea for government, what do you guys think? NOTE TO READER: This is a work in progress. I pride myself on not trying to prove a point, but rather searching for the solution. If there is flaws in this, great. That means I need to adjust it. Our goals shouldn't be to prove a point we already have, but rather to find the truth, whatever that may be.
Just socialism would involve liberating people from various chains of oppression, not trying to just create new ones. Stop trying to decide what other people should do, and then we can talk.
Capitalism was never truly tried. Our country has been a corporatist country for hundreds of years. Why are you so quick to judge capitalism as failed, when it hasn't even been tried in full?
Thanks god true capitalism hasn't been tried. Do you realize what that entails? For one thing, in a true capitalistic society, I can guarantee you that every market would be run by a monopoly. True capitalism won't stop monopolies. In true capitalism, those who can't get jobs will die. True capitalism is a lot worse than what we currently have.
Problem here is people aren't going to start business to hire if they're capped at 75K max. Giving people more money doesn't solve the economic problem of scarcity. The people have more green paper, but they still produced the same amount of shit (absolute best case). This will only cause inflation. In your system I get paid 25,000 to do nothing at all what so ever. That is a lack of productivity. I think this system would increase the number of poor and starving instead of lowering their numbers. I think you should come back to being a normal libertarian prince, I love the original thought (and the fact you realize things are fucked in this country), but your ideas kinda scare me a bit man.
The same place "money" comes from now. There's X amount of money. If you divide that amount of money by the amount of citizens, EVERYONE could be making decent money.That's the point.
NOTE TO READER: This is a work in progress. I pride myself on not trying to prove a point, but rather searching for the solution. If there is flaws in this, great. That means I need to adjust it. Our goals shouldn't be to prove a point we already have, but rather to find the truth, whatever that may be.
And that is the problem. Taking from one to give to another is called stealing, and it is wrong. Government is force. Government is a gun. Forcing people to part with their property violates the Natural Rights that we are all born with. For any form of socialism to work (in a way that protects rights), every single participant must be in the system voluntarily, and that will never happen on a national level. Forcing someone to give up their property is wrong when individuals do it, and it is wrong when governments do it. The Government gets its power from the consent of the governed -- if the governed do not have a power themselves, they cannot grant that power to the government...
I'm not forcing anyone to give up their property with this system. So you believe that that minimum wage that a burger king worker earns is his property inherently? And not because the owner decides to give it to him? Of course not. The work you do is worth whatever we as society decides it's worth.
No. We should get paid whatever the person we work for decides to pay us, NOT what someone in Washington thinks is fair. As far as the BK worker, he is merely exchanging one form of property (his time) into another form of property (money). And if, in your system, the government is involved AT ALL in determining compensation or wages, then FORCE is being used to take and redistribute property, instead of free men entering into an agreement to exchange value for value.
The work we do is worth what society, through the price mechanism of the free market, decide what a service is worth. The government is not capable of doing this on its own, see the "economic calculation problem".
Not an objective valuation of a service, just an arbitrary floor on the range of those values. As you see here, minimum wage causes less employment
/facepalm. It's impossible to exploit monopolies in 100 percent free market. Tell me how capitalism will have less jobs?