RE: Libertarian Social Democracy: Delegative Democracy, Land Value Tax, & Universal Basic Income
Excellent post!
I always cringe when people mention UBI because they haven't considered how it would accelerate inequality growth. The only way to combat that is by taxing economic privilege, such as using LVT.
Have you read about the Job Guarantee (JG) yet? If not, I highly recommend looking into it.
My preference would be to eliminate involuntary unemployment by using a JG, replacing (to some degree) inefficient and distortionary taxes like sales tax, income tax and corporate tax with LVT and other taxes on economic privilege. As the LVT would push down land prices, it creates a scenario of unfairness for people who bought at peak market prices (it's not their fault that the system's distorted), so I'd use a modern debt jubilee for a one-off payment that must be used first to pay down debts.
My vote isn't worth anything, but mentioning @originalworks will at least be of some benefit to you. Well done on your post.
The @OriginalWorks bot has determined this post by @ekklesiagora to be original material and upvoted(1.5%) it!
To call @OriginalWorks, simply reply to any post with @originalworks or !originalworks in your message!
Job guarantee is an old idea, I forget if it was Louis Blanc or Louis Blanqui (i get 'em mixed up) that first proposed it. Modern Monetary Theorists and a lot of social democrats have proposed it too. I don't really like the idea too much. I think basic income is a much better idea. I hate wage-slavery, and a job guarantee program can be a way of extending wage-slavery into a post-scarcity era. I certainly don't want to see capitalism and wage-slavery perpetuated. I dream of land value tax and basic income ushering in a transhumanist era. Job guarantee could definitely prevent transhumanism from succeeding. Personally, I would like to see humanity achieve biological immortality and technology that is basically equivalent to magic (being able to transmute elements and having a replicator, etc.).
JG isn't about welfare - it's a price stabiliser. Also, involuntary unemployment is an indicator that there isn't enough money circulating around the economy for transactions to happen smoothly, and it's a good way of injecting money into the economy (workers decide for themselves what the money should be spent on, which isn't distortionary).
Is it wage slavery if people want to work? It only targets involuntary unemployment - if people choose to not to participate, that's their decision. The costs of unemployment include psychological costs which are associated with feeling excluded, unwanted, disempowered. Handouts don't address this effectively.
People who are long-term unemployed lose not only their specialised skills, but their general skills also. A JG program keeps workers 'job ready' so that their transition into private sector employment isn't unnecessarily painful for all.
I disagree, basic income addresses the problem better. Basic income creates jobs. If you have mass unemployment, fewer people can afford to eat out, travel, vacation, go to amusement parks, attend concerts, etc. When you give basic income, people are gonna spend that money on something, and it naturally generates jobs wherever the people choose to spend the money, allowing the democracy of the market and demand to determine what jobs to create. Job guarantees, on the other hand, generate jobs in a more market-distorting fashion, not necessarily where people would choose to spend their money.
I think I'll write a few posts about it. I'll try to come at it from different angles and maybe we can make a series of posts and counter-posts, if you're interested.
I'm up for that, although I might be a little slow to respond.
That works for me.
By the way, thank you very, very much for all the upvotes!
Thank you for the good conversation and discussion.