Collective wealth leads to collective well-being

[EvilCat Breath]

This is my first attempt at creating a thread and I wasn't sure if this belongs in Politics or not but since the topic hits on several political issues of today I think it's probably fitting. To be transparent and to make this known I am not advocating for communism or even socialism with this opinion, it's just some personal thoughts.

What i'm talking about is using capitalism, free trade, free markets and our collective wealth as a nation to create collective well-being by investing in our society. That investment (taxes) would yield benefits like "free" medical care, dental care, education, maternity/paternity leaves, pre-k, among other benefits and programs provided for all citizens while also reducing the uncertainty millions of American feel everyday around these topics, the risk that millions of Americans take everyday for these topics, the lack of mobility and the the anxiety and stress that millions of Americans are under because of these issues. Reduced stress, reduced fear, reduced individual risk, reduced inequity in turn yields increased happiness, increased hope, increased societal investment, and increased collective well-being. There is a lot of detail that would go into taxation and what constitutes as "free" but that's something i'm open to discussing as this evolves.

People will often view higher taxes as a burden, and will also view higher taxes that would go towards increased government provided programs as socialist, however, if all citizens and companies truly contribute towards these programs and social programs by using the wealth we all create then it should be viewed as an investment, not a burden in my opinion. You are investing in the collective well-being of all people, including yourself, and if we are all contributing, if we are all putting our money into the effort, if we are all sacrificing a greater percentage of our personal gain for the greater collective good then what you end up with is a shared system that in essence purchases quality of life. No system is perfect, but closing the gap, creating a society that views success as something to share and not hoard, and putting the good of the many above the individual is in my opinion something to work towards.

While I can understand where you're coming from . . . and possibly why . . . I must strongly disagree. Perhaps the greatest gift given to every one of us by our American civilization is the freedom to succeed or fail on our own merit. We are a nation of individuals—not a collectivized identity or hive mind. What that means for each of us is that some of us will rise above others through hard work and sacrifice, while some of us—even family members and friends—might fall, financially, as a consequence of their own bad decisions or lack of effort. Truly this system is a double-edged sword but it is far preferable to most Americans than the alternative.

The flip side of our economic and political systems is collectivism. Collectivism removes individual identity from the average citizen and replaces it with a hive group classification. Individuals in a collective do not work toward the advancement of their own persons, but for the well being of the group as a whole. Trust me, we Americans do not want to go there, not ever.

Seems to me you're reason for forwarding this idea could be out of compassion for those fellow Americans who have less than you do. While contributing time or money to a charity is never a bad choice, the cold, hard truth of the matter is that there's always a reason why some have less and others more; that reason is personal responsibility and effort and hard work or lack thereof.

The only way to collectivize guaranteed success is to remove individual freedom. Most importantly, the freedom to fail or to succeed beyond one's dreams. Collectivization is the locking down of hope, dreams, individual prosperity and improvement over time.

Wisely said. Equality and freedom are mutually exclusive. They are polar opposites. Equality only exists under tyranny.

 

[Gdjjr]

Collective, in the political and religious sense, disrespects the Individual.
The collective fails without Individual effort.
To force, or coerce, or shame into compliance is immoral and shines the light on the disrespect 'intended', and make no mistake, it is intended in any situation that claims for the good of the people- people are Individuals. The "greater good" is accomplished through Individual effort, as is any practice/exercise.
The founders had some knowledge of human behavior from studying, duh, human behavior in History.
Their studying led them to believe that man acting in his own best interests best served his own best interest which creates the "greater good" for all.
They established a federal gov't, after a lot of haggling, that *limited* the federal gov't to certain enumerated powers by granting an authority to *certain* areas of commerce and trade to help prevent a legal advantage of one over another.
Nowhere, in that granted authority was the power granted to define equality or favor the collective over the Individual with laws that favored one over another.
Trying to convince, even collectivist, that their idea is good is impossible because of the Individual. If mutual agreement isn't achieved then force or coercion or shame is employed and that does nothing for the desired result of whatever the cause de jour.

The OP, and like minded, seem to believe there is a 'fix' which can be employed to make things better for all while disregarding that one man's trash is another man's treasure. Never mind the fix in still available in the constitution but will never happen as long as the authority granted is "disrespected" and the District of Criminals can line their pockets by theft (taxes) to buy the votes of the ignorant who were/are educated by the unconstitutional mandates chosen to be "forced" on the trusting public who believes that gov't is omnipotent.
It is up to the Individual. Period.

 

[Manonthestreet]

at least 25% personal income tax regardless of income.

In addition to current taxes?

Which taxes do you mean? What I am saying is a standard base rate of 25% personal income tax for everybody but then that goes up incrementally depending on your income and earnings.

Which taxes do you mean?

Income taxes.

View attachment 311604

What are the new rates for each bracket?

I don't have that amount of detail yet.

Bernie bot....,.,Everything is free....how much does that cost ….I have no idea......vote for me

I’m not a Bernie Sanders supporter and I don’t agree with the reasons or the methods he wants to use to achieve his goals, and I also know that what I’m proposing isn’t literally free. It would need an investment from all citizens and companies in this country for there to be the type of affordable access to the different systems that I would personally like to see.

That's not the purpose of govt. Go back to school.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Collective wealth leads to collective well-being

Bullshit

"Collective wealth" leads to a whole bunch of people doing jack shit while a few bust their asses.

This is not speculation. It actually happened here in the 1600s. Go do some fucking research and you will know.

.

 

[BrokeLoser]

The problem is; the notion of “collective wealth” is always pitched by those bottom feeding...Weird huh?

 

[Dragonlady]

This is my first attempt at creating a thread and I wasn't sure if this belongs in Politics or not but since the topic hits on several political issues of today I think it's probably fitting. To be transparent and to make this known I am not advocating for communism or even socialism with this opinion, it's just some personal thoughts.

What i'm talking about is using capitalism, free trade, free markets and our collective wealth as a nation to create collective well-being by investing in our society. That investment (taxes) would yield benefits like "free" medical care, dental care, education, maternity/paternity leaves, pre-k, among other benefits and programs provided for all citizens while also reducing the uncertainty millions of American feel everyday around these topics, the risk that millions of Americans take everyday for these topics, the lack of mobility and the the anxiety and stress that millions of Americans are under because of these issues. Reduced stress, reduced fear, reduced individual risk, reduced inequity in turn yields increased happiness, increased hope, increased societal investment, and increased collective well-being. There is a lot of detail that would go into taxation and what constitutes as "free" but that's something i'm open to discussing as this evolves.

People will often view higher taxes as a burden, and will also view higher taxes that would go towards increased government provided programs as socialist, however, if all citizens and companies truly contribute towards these programs and social programs by using the wealth we all create then it should be viewed as an investment, not a burden in my opinion. You are investing in the collective well-being of all people, including yourself, and if we are all contributing, if we are all putting our money into the effort, if we are all sacrificing a greater percentage of our personal gain for the greater collective good then what you end up with is a shared system that in essence purchases quality of life. No system is perfect, but closing the gap, creating a society that views success as something to share and not hoard, and putting the good of the many above the individual is in my opinion something to work towards.

There is no such thing as 'collective wealth'. Having money you can't spend doesn't make you wealthy, even if you can somehow claim it's your money.

When wealth is distributed by politicians or commissars from a central pool, it won't go to those who created it. It will go to those who are deemed most worthy or needy by the commissars.

We will become a nation of beggars. Making appeals to our leaders for a larger portion than our neighbor based on our pitiful situation.

Personally, I'd rather burn my money than contribute it to a collective pool and beg for some of it back because I'm needy.

There is such a thing as "collective wealth", which conservative Americans refuse to acknowledge exists, or that Republican leaders have engineered a political system which ensures that the collective wealth is only in the hands of the wealthiest Americans, creating a class of oligarchs, who have siezed control of the economic levers of the country.

The "collective wealth" consists of the schools, libraries, fire departments, and public streets, roadways and sewers owned by the municipalities, counties, states, and federal government. There is also the GDP, which is the collective production of wealth of the nation, which the oligarchs have engineered the tax and businiess structures so that the wealth of the nation is now owed to the top, and the workers are barely making enough money to survive.

That economic model is about to be tested in spades in your service, low income economy.

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

What i'm talking about is using capitalism, free trade, free markets and our collective wealth as a nation to create collective well-being by investing in our society

Serving the "public good" is something corporations abandoned around the time of the Robber Barons.

The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly: A Summary (Chp. 9)

"We need a new economic principle that says that public companies have a responsibility to the public good.

"We had this once upon a time at our founding as a nation, when corporations were chartered by individual states only to serve the public good.

"This tradition was gradually eroded by the courts right around the time of the Robber Barrons.

"The original intention behind the corporation in America’s early years, however, was definitely serving the public good – the 'polar star' of the American Revolution.

"Shareholder primacy emerged out of common law in the mid-nineteenth century, right around the same time stockholders’ agents developed our modern financial statements as a way to keep tabs on how well their principles’ investments were doing.

"These reports were never intended to represent the corporations overall performance.

"They were simply the slice that stockholders cared about – and that’s the part that we are stuck with today, and something all companies are legally required to produce on an ongoing basis."

I simply just meant that companies and corporations would pay much more in taxes and that the money would also contribute to the services for all.

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

This is my first attempt at creating a thread and I wasn't sure if this belongs in Politics or not but since the topic hits on several political issues of today I think it's probably fitting. To be transparent and to make this known I am not advocating for communism or even socialism with this opinion, it's just some personal thoughts.

What i'm talking about is using capitalism, free trade, free markets and our collective wealth as a nation to create collective well-being by investing in our society. That investment (taxes) would yield benefits like "free" medical care, dental care, education, maternity/paternity leaves, pre-k, among other benefits and programs provided for all citizens while also reducing the uncertainty millions of American feel everyday around these topics, the risk that millions of Americans take everyday for these topics, the lack of mobility and the the anxiety and stress that millions of Americans are under because of these issues. Reduced stress, reduced fear, reduced individual risk, reduced inequity in turn yields increased happiness, increased hope, increased societal investment, and increased collective well-being. There is a lot of detail that would go into taxation and what constitutes as "free" but that's something i'm open to discussing as this evolves.

People will often view higher taxes as a burden, and will also view higher taxes that would go towards increased government provided programs as socialist, however, if all citizens and companies truly contribute towards these programs and social programs by using the wealth we all create then it should be viewed as an investment, not a burden in my opinion. You are investing in the collective well-being of all people, including yourself, and if we are all contributing, if we are all putting our money into the effort, if we are all sacrificing a greater percentage of our personal gain for the greater collective good then what you end up with is a shared system that in essence purchases quality of life. No system is perfect, but closing the gap, creating a society that views success as something to share and not hoard, and putting the good of the many above the individual is in my opinion something to work towards.

That investment (taxes) would yield benefits like "free" medical care, dental care, education, maternity/paternity leaves, pre-k, among other benefits and programs provided for all citizens while also reducing the uncertainty millions of American feel everyday around these topics, the risk that millions of Americans take everyday for these topics, the lack of mobility and the the anxiety and stress that millions of Americans are under because of these issues.

Awesome!

How much tax and on what?

To be fair i'm not a tax expert and so the exact number would need to be analyzed, but I think a good starting point would be at least 25% personal income tax regardless of income. After that depending on your income the % would be higher for each tax bracket. It wouldn't go over 50% for any bracket but the top bracket would expect to have their income tax rate be around that mark. Ultimately the gap between the lowest income tax bracket and the highest income bracket would not be nearly as significant as it is now. In addition, higher taxes on all any and all stock market transactions, capital gain, dividends, and so on, a corporate tax rate increase to at least a flat rate of 25% as well with earnings dictating increased rates similar to personal income tax rates. The largest sectors such as energy, primarily oil and natural gas companies would have up to 50% of earnings reinvested into social programs as well as power plants and power companies with a minimum of 25%. I'd say that an increased sales tax/value added tax would be a reasonable addition as well.

The basic premise is that everybody of all brackets and companies as well pay into the system as equally as possible based on income, revenues, and so on. When the CEO and the front line worker contribute towards the same healthcare, the same education, the same social safety nets, then in my opinion there is a greater shared interest in seeing it run well and run equally.

You grasp that that wouldn't even begin to pay for all the giveaways and freebies you want, right? In fact, even if we doubled the tax you want it wouldn't even cover the free medical care.

{The most comprehensive cost analysis of the Medicare for All bill estimated that the legislation would cost $32.6 trillion over its first decade. This estimate is conservative at best, and comically so at worst. It assumes that physicians and hospitals would take home a reimbursement rate 40 percent lower than private insurance, which nearly three-quarters of the country currently use. (Government insurance programs, such as Medicare, already reimburse far less than private insurance, rendering the current average reimbursement rate 20 percent lower than our private one.)}

The real cost of 'Medicare for all'

I appreciate that but I’m not necessarily talking about Medicare For All in the way that it’s currently used and thought of being used by people like Sanders. I’m talking about changing the whole system along with culture.

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

Which taxes do you mean? What I am saying is a standard base rate of 25% personal income tax for everybody but then that goes up incrementally depending on your income and earnings.

Which taxes do you mean?

Income taxes.

View attachment 311604

What are the new rates for each bracket?

I don't have that amount of detail yet.

Bernie bot....,.,Everything is free....how much does that cost ….I have no idea......vote for me

I’m not a Bernie Sanders supporter and I don’t agree with the reasons or the methods he wants to use to achieve his goals, and I also know that what I’m proposing isn’t literally free. It would need an investment from all citizens and companies in this country for there to be the type of affordable access to the different systems that I would personally like to see.

That's not the purpose of govt. Go back to school.

Government's purpose is to serve its people. If the people want change and to grant it the ability to provide certain services then it’s within its purpose in my opinion.

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

The problem is; the notion of “collective wealth” is always pitched by those bottom feeding...Weird huh?

What gives you the impression that I’m a “bottom feeder”? Collective wealth in the context of my opening post is the overall wealth generated in this country through our system of capitalism and free markets.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Which taxes do you mean?

Income taxes.

View attachment 311604

What are the new rates for each bracket?

I don't have that amount of detail yet.

Bernie bot....,.,Everything is free....how much does that cost ….I have no idea......vote for me

I’m not a Bernie Sanders supporter and I don’t agree with the reasons or the methods he wants to use to achieve his goals, and I also know that what I’m proposing isn’t literally free. It would need an investment from all citizens and companies in this country for there to be the type of affordable access to the different systems that I would personally like to see.

That's not the purpose of govt. Go back to school.

Government's purpose is to serve its people. If the people want change and to grant it the ability to provide certain services then it’s within its purpose in my opinion.

No it's not. What don't you have access to?

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

I don't have that amount of detail yet.

Bernie bot....,.,Everything is free....how much does that cost ….I have no idea......vote for me

I’m not a Bernie Sanders supporter and I don’t agree with the reasons or the methods he wants to use to achieve his goals, and I also know that what I’m proposing isn’t literally free. It would need an investment from all citizens and companies in this country for there to be the type of affordable access to the different systems that I would personally like to see.

That's not the purpose of govt. Go back to school.

Government's purpose is to serve its people. If the people want change and to grant it the ability to provide certain services then it’s within its purpose in my opinion.

No it's not. What don't you have access to?

Im not really talking about access in the same way you are though, I’m talking about the costs and the process and how those affects access for millions of middle class people.

 

[blastoff]

This is my first attempt at creating a thread and I wasn't sure if this belongs in Politics or not but since the topic hits on several political issues of today I think it's probably fitting. To be transparent and to make this known I am not advocating for communism or even socialism with this opinion, it's just some personal thoughts.

What i'm talking about is using capitalism, free trade, free markets and our collective wealth as a nation to create collective well-being by investing in our society. That investment (taxes) would yield benefits like "free" medical care, dental care, education, maternity/paternity leaves, pre-k, among other benefits and programs provided for all citizens while also reducing the uncertainty millions of American feel everyday around these topics, the risk that millions of Americans take everyday for these topics, the lack of mobility and the the anxiety and stress that millions of Americans are under because of these issues. Reduced stress, reduced fear, reduced individual risk, reduced inequity in turn yields increased happiness, increased hope, increased societal investment, and increased collective well-being. There is a lot of detail that would go into taxation and what constitutes as "free" but that's something i'm open to discussing as this evolves.

People will often view higher taxes as a burden, and will also view higher taxes that would go towards increased government provided programs as socialist, however, if all citizens and companies truly contribute towards these programs and social programs by using the wealth we all create then it should be viewed as an investment, not a burden in my opinion. You are investing in the collective well-being of all people, including yourself, and if we are all contributing, if we are all putting our money into the effort, if we are all sacrificing a greater percentage of our personal gain for the greater collective good then what you end up with is a shared system that in essence purchases quality of life. No system is perfect, but closing the gap, creating a society that views success as something to share and not hoard, and putting the good of the many above the individual is in my opinion something to work towards.

There is no such thing as 'collective wealth'. Having money you can't spend doesn't make you wealthy, even if you can somehow claim it's your money.

When wealth is distributed by politicians or commissars from a central pool, it won't go to those who created it. It will go to those who are deemed most worthy or needy by the commissars.

We will become a nation of beggars. Making appeals to our leaders for a larger portion than our neighbor based on our pitiful situation.

Personally, I'd rather burn my money than contribute it to a collective pool and beg for some of it back because I'm needy.

Well the commissars might well indeed spend a trifle on those deemed worthy/needy, but a hell of a lot more money will end up with those in power, a la Venezuela recently. Doubt all their worthy folks had their needs fulfilled before Hugo’s daughter ended up with a reported $3-4 billion in her accounts.

 

[BrokeLoser]

The problem is; the notion of “collective wealth” is always pitched by those bottom feeding...Weird huh?

What gives you the impression that I’m a “bottom feeder”? Collective wealth in the context of my opening post is the overall wealth generated in this country through our system of capitalism and free markets.

It’s quite simple really...the “overall wealth” is originated by individuals and not the collective. Can you connect the dots?

 

[there4eyeM]

This is my first attempt at creating a thread and I wasn't sure if this belongs in Politics or not but since the topic hits on several political issues of today I think it's probably fitting. To be transparent and to make this known I am not advocating for communism or even socialism with this opinion, it's just some personal thoughts.

What i'm talking about is using capitalism, free trade, free markets and our collective wealth as a nation to create collective well-being by investing in our society. That investment (taxes) would yield benefits like "free" medical care, dental care, education, maternity/paternity leaves, pre-k, among other benefits and programs provided for all citizens while also reducing the uncertainty millions of American feel everyday around these topics, the risk that millions of Americans take everyday for these topics, the lack of mobility and the the anxiety and stress that millions of Americans are under because of these issues. Reduced stress, reduced fear, reduced individual risk, reduced inequity in turn yields increased happiness, increased hope, increased societal investment, and increased collective well-being. There is a lot of detail that would go into taxation and what constitutes as "free" but that's something i'm open to discussing as this evolves.

People will often view higher taxes as a burden, and will also view higher taxes that would go towards increased government provided programs as socialist, however, if all citizens and companies truly contribute towards these programs and social programs by using the wealth we all create then it should be viewed as an investment, not a burden in my opinion. You are investing in the collective well-being of all people, including yourself, and if we are all contributing, if we are all putting our money into the effort, if we are all sacrificing a greater percentage of our personal gain for the greater collective good then what you end up with is a shared system that in essence purchases quality of life. No system is perfect, but closing the gap, creating a society that views success as something to share and not hoard, and putting the good of the many above the individual is in my opinion something to work towards.

There is no such thing as 'collective wealth'. Having money you can't spend doesn't make you wealthy, even if you can somehow claim it's your money.

When wealth is distributed by politicians or commissars from a central pool, it won't go to those who created it. It will go to those who are deemed most worthy or needy by the commissars.

We will become a nation of beggars. Making appeals to our leaders for a larger portion than our neighbor based on our pitiful situation.

Personally, I'd rather burn my money than contribute it to a collective pool and beg for some of it back because I'm needy.

She is talking about wealth, not money.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Bernie bot....,.,Everything is free....how much does that cost ….I have no idea......vote for me

I’m not a Bernie Sanders supporter and I don’t agree with the reasons or the methods he wants to use to achieve his goals, and I also know that what I’m proposing isn’t literally free. It would need an investment from all citizens and companies in this country for there to be the type of affordable access to the different systems that I would personally like to see.

That's not the purpose of govt. Go back to school.

Government's purpose is to serve its people. If the people want change and to grant it the ability to provide certain services then it’s within its purpose in my opinion.

No it's not. What don't you have access to?

Im not really talking about access in the same way you are though, I’m talking about the costs and the process and how those affects access for millions of middle class people.

Sure you are. You want the money for power so your govt cronies decide access. Try breaking up the monopolies and enforcing laws you might find your "access" problem goes away

 

[Natural Citizen]

The way that money volume is handled is not socialism.. Money NEEDS to be injected into the financial institutions when the economy speeds up.. Just like it's taken away when it's not.. If ya got an increasing GDP, the money needs to be there. And Unk Sam can't just drop it from black helicopters...

To even remotely refer to this as a free market model is laughable.

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

The problem is; the notion of “collective wealth” is always pitched by those bottom feeding...Weird huh?

What gives you the impression that I’m a “bottom feeder”? Collective wealth in the context of my opening post is the overall wealth generated in this country through our system of capitalism and free markets.

It’s quite simple really...the “overall wealth” is originated by individuals and not the collective. Can you connect the dots?

All Americans make up a collective. We are all individuals but we are all also in this journey together. The American psyche over the generations has been about individualism. It’s individual ambition driving individual success. If someone gets passed up along the way then they are weak or lazy. That’s the mindset, the culture that needs to change before any successful program to benefit all Americans could truly take shape in my opinion. It’s not weakness to want less of a gap between the rich and the poor. It’s not weakness to think a system that everybody contributes to and that everybody uses equally is better than only getting what you can afford. It’s a different set of ideals. I’m not looking towards socialist countries like Venezuela and Cuba for inspiration, they are not the end goal for me. Not even our current politicians on the left talk about these things in the way that I personally see it.

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

I’m not a Bernie Sanders supporter and I don’t agree with the reasons or the methods he wants to use to achieve his goals, and I also know that what I’m proposing isn’t literally free. It would need an investment from all citizens and companies in this country for there to be the type of affordable access to the different systems that I would personally like to see.

That's not the purpose of govt. Go back to school.

Government's purpose is to serve its people. If the people want change and to grant it the ability to provide certain services then it’s within its purpose in my opinion.

No it's not. What don't you have access to?

Im not really talking about access in the same way you are though, I’m talking about the costs and the process and how those affects access for millions of middle class people.

Sure you are. You want the money for power so your govt cronies decide access. Try breaking up the monopolies and enforcing laws you might find your "access" problem goes away

I’m not interested in power. I’m interested in a system that closes the gap between rich and poor. A system that everybody feels a connection with through a shared investment.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Collective wealth in the context of my opening post is the overall wealth generated in this country through our system of capitalism and free markets.

We don't have a system of free market capitalism. We're Keynesians. They have a belief in central economic planning by a central bank. They have a belief in a centrally controlled economy. They have a belief in deficit financing. They have a belief in inflationism. They have a belief in a welfare/warfare state. To refer to this as free market capitalism is laughable.

You're debating people who have no idea what they're talking about and who shouldn't be anywhere near an economics/monetary policy discussion. They're no less socialist than the people they call socialist. To their credit, they're basically ignorant to that reality. They're no less big government, so don't let em fool you.

Trump just introduced his 2021 fiscal budget. It's 4.8 trillion dollars. The largest fiscal budget in American history. Ask em who's gonna get suck paying the principal plus interest on all of the debt that's gonna generate and see what they tell you. So far it's been nothing but crickets chirping about it.