Dr. Jeff
· 26w
I generally despise politics and am neither a Republican or Democrat, but somebody needs to lay it out:
A Revolution--likely violent--is coming soon.
Income inequality in the US--and around the worl...
Agree with your what Dr. Jeff - disagree with your how. As such, you can't critique without standing on a box: here's the box.
1. Can't comment on the C-Suite executives 30-to-1 but like it. Additionally I'd implement a removal of . Why? Because if companies can focus on adding value - period - to all people they serve, they will be better for it. If you employees WANT to be your customers and not just your shareholders, the feedback loop feels like it will be positive.
2. Phase one SS completely. 100%. Overflow payments are required to be made by people in government, who's earnings and expenditures must be capped at their government salary rate. No one in government, who makes policy and affects change like they do with insider info, should be able to profit off of that information (as they do now.) Every government job is capped at your salary rate. Anything earned above that rate goes directly to paying off the national debt. You're a "public servant." Act like it. You work for us, not the other way around.
3. Disagree on the debt Jubilee. We can incentivize with low-pay government jobs that offer a 1:1 additional payoff so they can earn $ but then get extra $ paid toward their loans -- but it's gotta be a work / value transfer. If people get something for nothing, they're ungrateful and spoilt. See also, everything happening in the US right now...
4. I like this one, but I'd go further and disincentivize companies first. Companies should face huge tax implications, not be able to write off anything related to single-family housing or multi-family housing that's not 10+ families. The incentive needs to be optimizing their current businesses, not just acquiring more property to watch it appreciate.
5. Aspects of this are interesting, but I think this should be more of a social push than a government one. If we can get governments and people to be more service oriented, i think we could have more ideas -- like Saylor doing grants for people looking to start businesses or whatever -- vs. giving the money to lower-income people. There is a group of people in the middle of the bell-curve who want to be told what to do. And there are groups at the top and bottom who want to build. We need to find the builders. The people who can make 2+2=5. Give it to them. How do we find them - that's the next question to ponder...
Appreciate you Dr. Jeff!
