What if we let people get rich, but dissuaded them from becoming too rich. You have an index that moves with the economy that sets a maximum reasonable income level and then tax the rest at 90%, to be used for social programs, infrastructure, etc…
How much money does one person really need? When there are individuals who are worth more than some countries, have we not let the concept of money devolve into wealth barbarism? Do not forget that money is by its very nature a finite resource. The richer someone is, the poorer others are.
I fully endorsed the positive aspect of currency, for example incentive for achievement and ease of trade, but we must find a way to lift people up without pushing others down.
The US has taken it’s first truly backward step in a long time. They’ve let mostly baseless hate and fear trick them into electing a shitty business man and reality TV personality into a job even he knew wasn’t within his abilities to do.
The responsitity for this tragedy goes mostly to the 120 million eligible voters who did not vote. The 62 million people who did vote for him had their reasons. The 64 million who voted for Hillary had theirs. It wasn’t enough because the electoral college got aced by the RNC this time.
Washington’s corruption, ineptitudes and sometimes baffling incompetence are just humans traits. Let’s face it, it doesn’t matter who is running the system or what the laws are; humans are imperfect and opportunistic. You don’t get elected to anything if you’re not already putting on an act of some sort. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
The left had a good thing going though, they are typically on the right side of history and science. They’ve even grown accustomed to laughing at the right, and often with good reason. No one likes being laughed at.
Trump’s win is proof positive that derision isn’t good in politics. Furthermore and more importantly, intolerance of intolerance just doesn’t seem to be doing the trick.
We need to find ways to open communication back up, even to the absolute worst of the worst, lest the problem fester and actually get worse. It began festering big time when Obama won, and we now know just how toxic it became.
It’s not illegal to have an opinion, regardless of how misguided, disgusting or blind it is, so we can’t just treat these miscreants with disrespect, like we can actual criminals. We need to listen, share and hope to teach. The only concrete way to enact real positive change is to lead by example.
Human kind is at a crossroads. There’s a gigantic contradiction in our society that people rarely talk about, if they even admit it exists.
We do unspeakable things to animals for their meat, fur, labor and more. All while freaking out about even the tiniest injustice done to humans, and cats, and dogs.
I am sure that some pet owners would kill to protect their animals (and other material possessions…) and still eat meat. Of course there are vegetarians and vegans, so clearly this contradiction doesn’t apply to everyone globally, but legally and psychologically this attitude gap is fascinating.
It’s not clear if we’ll continue to move towards more human rights, and animal rights, because activists have been decrying the treatment of animals for a long time, and many people will even buy cleaner meat products (humane treatment of live stock, if such a thing is possible), and still not much has changed.
It’s entirely possible that the laws we have protecting humans and organizations are perhaps too strict. We could end up with a middle ground between living beings being consider products to be slaughtered and sold and life being generally respected, if such a thing is possible.
Clearly some of our ideals neglect to take into account the reality of our existence because after all, life must consume to continue.