Yeah, I think we’re largely aligned indeed, and I appreciate your detailed response!
We can start by taxing land, sure, but why the hangup with that in particular? We could argue instead for collective ownership of all housing, all means of production, and all land, and this way the exploitation would stop altogether.
I think I could also agree on collective ownership of housing, although I’m not yet certain it’s necessary. After all, from what I read about land-value taxation (which admittedly is still not a lot yet), it incentivises development of properties, so the land taxation alone might improve the housing situation too.
But a collective ownership of the means of production is something I’m more sceptical about. Because we want people to own the fruits of their labour, so if they make something, it’s theirs, which is the reward for making something in the first place. But then if I make something to improve food production, I become forced to share it with everyone? That de-incentivises people to work on such endeavour. I still agree that sharing improved means of food production is a good thing, but I don’t think an overly strict interpretation of shared ownership is the answer. The current practice of a time-limited patent might actually suffice.
I just don’t think real democracy is possible in a two-class system where a minority class (capitalists) have the economic power
Yes, I agree. Though in the proposal that I linked, there is indeed a two-class system but one where the minority class are explicitly prevented from having any personal ownership. This then incentivises them towards preventing capitalist excesses, since capitalists that become too powerful may actually become a threat to their own power. But it’s still merely a thought experiment too, so I don’t know if it would work out as intended.
Yeah, I think we’re largely aligned indeed, and I appreciate your detailed response!
I think I could also agree on collective ownership of housing, although I’m not yet certain it’s necessary. After all, from what I read about land-value taxation (which admittedly is still not a lot yet), it incentivises development of properties, so the land taxation alone might improve the housing situation too.
But a collective ownership of the means of production is something I’m more sceptical about. Because we want people to own the fruits of their labour, so if they make something, it’s theirs, which is the reward for making something in the first place. But then if I make something to improve food production, I become forced to share it with everyone? That de-incentivises people to work on such endeavour. I still agree that sharing improved means of food production is a good thing, but I don’t think an overly strict interpretation of shared ownership is the answer. The current practice of a time-limited patent might actually suffice.
Yes, I agree. Though in the proposal that I linked, there is indeed a two-class system but one where the minority class are explicitly prevented from having any personal ownership. This then incentivises them towards preventing capitalist excesses, since capitalists that become too powerful may actually become a threat to their own power. But it’s still merely a thought experiment too, so I don’t know if it would work out as intended.