• @Keeponstalin
    link
    English
    94 months ago

    Raising the standard of living and improving the purchasing power of the individual DOES improve the economy because it enables more people to spend more on foods and services. They are financed by raising taxes on the ultra wealthy and corporations. The money is already earned, the difference it whether it gets pocketed and horded by executives or recirculated into the economy by improving the standard of living of the populace

    • @samokosik
      link
      English
      -94 months ago

      Those ultra wealthy people and corporations are not that stupid. If they see they can exist and pay less in a different country, they will just move. Everyone will be happy apart from the country which rose the taxes.

      Of course that rising living standards improves economy but not in a way where you just sponsor good housing for your whole population.

        • @samokosik
          link
          English
          -8
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Well sure they don’t flee New York, California and other places where despite high taxes they can still make large amounts of money. Simply because most of development is there. If they can make 50k a month and pay 50% taxes in NY (just an example) compared to 10k and 10% taxes somewhere else (they would just stay).

          However, this is not California/NY and you can easily check what high taxes do here. People register companies in Ireland and Cyprus, so they can pay the least taxes possible. Then, due to european union being european union, they can operate in their home country.

          • @Keeponstalin
            link
            English
            74 months ago

            We’ve already established that taxes on the rich/corporations that are used to improve the standard of living of the citizens of the country does increase development and stimulate the economy. Do you have any sources to back up your views? Because so far they don’t seem based on any real world data

      • @jorp
        link
        English
        74 months ago

        Let the capitalists flee, easier than rounding them up. The workers will still be there, and the workers are the economy

        • @samokosik
          link
          English
          -94 months ago

          Yes, let the capitalists flee, so there is no one to pay the taxes. That seems like a very wise plan.

          In addition, every company needs just workers. Management, engineers and so on are practically useless.

          This would surely work very well.

          Hint: You can actually see how brilliantly it worked during 1940s-1990s in the countries under Warsaw pact.

          • @jorp
            link
            English
            44 months ago

            lol managers and engineers aren’t workers TIL

            • @samokosik
              link
              English
              -24 months ago

              So essentially no one can leave then? First you say that capitalists should leave but workers stay. Then you say managers and engineers are workers…

              So essentially you want everyone to stay?

              • @jorp
                link
                English
                34 months ago

                I see you don’t understand the most basic division between the working class and the owning class

                You have no class consciousness.

                I feel bad that I mocked you earlier, you don’t have clear ideas about what capitalism is, what the working class is, or how our economic system is based on economic dictatorship by wealthier people over poorer people.

                Socialism is about making the economy into a democracy, you don’t want your private life or public life controlled by a dictator, why your work life? That’s half your waking hours. You’re living in a dictatorship for half the time you’re conscious.

                The workers should own what they produce, that includes management, it includes “skilled” labor and “unskilled” labor. It includes everyone but the shareholders and private owners who are a parasite.

                • @samokosik
                  link
                  English
                  -34 months ago

                  First of all, I do not see how our lives are based on a dictatorship by wealthier people.

                  How do you then want to democratize the economy? Do you want companies to have a structure where everyone votes?

                  You know, there is a significant difference between a state and a company. When you dislike a company, you can very easily just move to another one, when you feel abused by your boss, you can change the job anytime. In most countries, we have no laws that prohibit you from changing your job. On the other hand, to get a citizenship in my country, you need to live here realistically for 8 years. What I am trying to say here is that even if a company has a terrible leadership, it’s not the end of the world. It will probably end bankrupt but people can still find a job somewhere else. On the other hand, incompetent leading of a state can impact life more seriously and most importantly an individual cannot change the situation easily.

                  Last but not least you are saying that shareholders and private owners are parasites is not true at all. They give money to the company. Without that, you can have skilled employees but will they work for the sake of enjoying life in a democratic company? I highly doubt.

                  • @jorp
                    link
                    English
                    14 months ago

                    you really can’t imagine anything else can you? this is what’s called “capitalist realism”