• ricecake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’d say end private student loans, not federal, and develop a program for automatic forgiveness and universal higher education.

    Most people most of the time should be able to get as much education as they care to get, courtesy of the public. For everything else I could see deferred interest federal loans with a procedure for automatic forgiveness. (Went to Cambridge but then came back to the US to live and work? Should cost you as much as going to a state University, just more paperwork)

    I’d also like easier immigration, and much more lax work visa standards. Right now people can get taken advantage of with the H1B program, since deportation for unemployment is a pretty strong incentive to put up with bad work conditions.

  • setInner234@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    8 months ago

    Collateral for loan is realised gain. Nice. I always wondered what a good mechanism against that kind of tax cheating would be.

    • TheKMAP@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      How about ending step-up basis and have the taxes in gains taken from the estate before inheritance?

  • spujb@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    if you want to make this a real project: some of your items are clearly actionable and fairly self-contained. for example STAR voting is pretty well defined. other ones, not so much. “abolish the filibuster” and “end religious tax exemption” have inumerable possible implementations where many of the nuances will have far reaching implications.

    would be interested in this project being separated out into a separate community to avoid spam and start seeing what legislation lemmy comes up with. call it lemmyslation (patent pending lol). maybe put the legal code on github? idrk how github works.

  • jcs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    I used to work for the U.S. Department of Defense and can confidently approve of massive defense budget cuts and merging of several military branches. This is only a single and relatively minor anecdote, but it is a small piece of a much larger problem and is one I can share from personal experience:

    I used to be the government lead for a highly successful defensive capability that only consisted of myself and 2-3 defense contractors. We outperformed several long-standing projects that had 10x the staff, 100x the budget, and had been around for approx 10 years without going operational (“operational” in this case meaning that intelligence analysts are authorized to provide actionable intelligence derived solely from the tool). My team released 3 operational releases within 1 calendar year from the start of contract.

    I don’t say this to disparage the staff of the other project(s), but rather to highlight how the government can afford to cut long-standing under-performing projects and become more lean and efficient. The government funding allocation is often in the realm of $300k/yr for a single FTE. Multiply that by a team of 20-30 that works on a project that is shelfware after 8-10 years.

    My same project was approached by numerous branches of the US and FVEY military community. Branch A offered tons of money to put it on a ship; branch B offered even more money to put it in the back of reconnaissance aircraft or fighter jet; branch C offered money to make it man-packable for ground troops. US taxpayers already paid for this capability once (my team and myself) and we made it as unclassified (i.e. disseminable) and modular as possible (it was literally designed to run on a general host computer running Linux), yet each branch was willing to fork over tens of millions of dollars for something they could have installed on a $2k computer using some internal software repository. And that’s what I suggested they do.

    Again, this is just one minor anecdote. How often does this happen where taxpayers are forced (being that they have absolutely no control over how the defense budget is organized) to pay for the same (perhaps MUCH more expensive) tools e.g. 5-10 times because military branch A, B, C, etc, want their own flavor of the same thing? Why does the military often have pissing matches of authority when there is so much overlap between some of them? Take away their stick by taking away some of their funding, and force them to share and cooperate.

    • Pandantic [they/them]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      No, this is the democratic far left wishlist, which I think is core lemmy. Good luck getting it done. Once you step over that line, you may want to find another instance.

          • Feddyteddy@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            Don’t bother with this whoreticulture account, they are just on here to pretend to be trans and then they behave like an ass to try to get people to dislike trans people or something. I know it’s stupid, but you can take a look at their account history to see what they are doing. It’s no wonder it’s a new account, I imagine they are doing this a lot. I’m working on a little script that just auto-warns people about them.

              • Feddyteddy@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                I’m not mad. I haven’t called you any childish names, or did anything else that would indicate anger. That would be you and you alone, and unless you go and start editing your posts anyone can clearly see that.

                • good_girl@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  I’m gonna be real, looking through your account, you seem like a bioessentialist. Potentially a terf, though one that hides it well.

                  Some of the things you’ve said are rooted in bioessentialism and come off as very backhanded which I’m assuming set off the other commenter’s alarm bells. Quit the act or educate yourself from a trans positive feminist angle, whichever fits your role better.

                  for anyone that happens to read this and feels lost, here is a good place to start with what bioessentialism is and why it’s linked to terfs.

                • whoreticulture@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  TERF isn’t name calling, it’s a description of your beliefs. the fact that you see it as such shows me you are one, terfs are the only ppl who refer to “terf” as a slur

            • Pandantic [they/them]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              According to the upvotes (which isn’t totally accurate since I upvoted from Midwest.social, but all the true leftists and maybe the far right instances have been defederated), it’s about a 70/30% split of people who agree with these democratic far left ideas.

        • K3zi4@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          8 months ago

          Capitalism has really done a number on these poor Americans, the right wing have managed to push the compass so far in their favour that even a lot of the most basic items in this list are considered “far left” to them.

          One prime example of the extremes of propaganda within the US has to be the mass opposition towards unions (which has thankfully began to ease in recent years.) I could never comprehend why so many people would argue against having a union to protect their own rights as workers. it was bizarre to me.

          No offence to any Americans that read this. But I’ve done my fair share of arguing for you over the years, and some of the opposition I have come up against is just completely bewildering. Almost like some sort of capitalist Stockholm syndrome.

          • Pandantic [they/them]@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            capitalist Stockholm syndrome.

            That infused with the idea that anything that isn’t capitalism is socialism (which might as well be communism). It’s like we’re afraid to leave our abusive financial system.

            • K3zi4@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              You are, and that’s by design, as the core of your country from the education right down to the media and pop culture, all revolve around the financial system, designed to keep the wealth in the pockets of the few while everyone else argues over the same pointless and divisive issues that are pushed every single day. It happens in most countries, but the US is the best example due to how transparent it all is.

  • chetradley@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    8 months ago

    Asking again if you would make a community for this, as it would be nice to discuss each point individually and for others to add points.

  • untorquer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Mass transit buss, train, continuous across the country (inter/intra state, city, etc…)

    Pedestrian and bike infrastructure, continuous and shielded from motor vehicles, in part or supplement to all main roads, highways, etc…

    End and roll back privatization of public services

    Universal pre-K

    After school activities funding

    Safe third places for teens/young adults (malls? Pools? Idk what kids are into these days)

    Free adult education (community college subsidy, Library programs, etc…)

    Etc…

  • TAG@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Why a land tax? Many (most? all?) towns and cities have a real estate tax.

    You forgot long term capital gains tax. There is no reason that the investor class should be paying a flat 15% tax. Critics will quickly jump up to say that we need to incentivise people to make long term investments in businesses, which I agree with, so short term capital gains should be taxed like gambling winnings.

    Also, minimum wage can be addressed with a one time bump and after that, make tax brackets, 401k contribution limits, etc. multiples of the federal minimum wage.

    • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      There’s a movement called Georgism that advocates for abolishment of all taxes, except for a land-value tax. (“Land” being any extractive natural resource use.) It’s really the only fair tax system. At the risk of oversimplifying it: All wealth comes from a combination of natural resources and labor. Natural resources belong to all of humanity, so it’s not fair to give ownership of them to well-connected individuals or firms to profit from extracting and selling them. On the other side, an individual’s labor is the only thing that people have that’s entirely their own. It’s not fair to tax individual labor, like an income tax, as nobody else should have any claim on its value. Thus, the taxes to run a society should come from the use of humanity’s limited store of natural resources/land, rather than have value which belongs to us all disappear info the pockets of a few individuals, while most people must work to justify their existence while the value of that labor is siphoned away.

        • agamemnonymous
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Machines, buildings, and tools are themselves products of natural resources and labor.

          • TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            This is true, as the constituent parts of the instruments are the act of labor forming natural resources into the instruments.

            But this isn’t necessarily relevant to the processes of production. The role of the instruments is to assist labor into effectively and efficiently creating the product. They are enabling and organizing labor. This is capital.

            We should never forget that all forms of capital are created through accreted layers of labor. But in terms of value creation, the must be seen as capital because the instruments serve a productive process resulting in a product that is valued by society. As such, capital is in conversation with society.

            To highlight the above, I’ll create an egregious example. We could argue that all labor is essential natural resources as all bodies are just made of matter anyways. But labor is directed through the needs of the laborer and society. Through a mixture of consciousness, intention, and creativity, that labor creates something of value for themselves and others.

            Capital, in my understanding, is akin to this in the productive process.

      • TAG@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        It is a beautiful philosophy, but the issue with a land tax is that it is regressive, meaning the poor pay a larger portion of their income than the rich. If you look at detached suburban homes, from 100m² single floor starter homes to 1000m² mansions, the size of the lot is about the same. If you look at high density urban housing, a skyscraper full of luxury condos uses less land per occupant than cheap multi-family homes.

        It seems to make the most sense in Soviet style ultra high density housing where the poor live 4 to a shoe box while the rich have luxury country estates.

        • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          I took a while to ponder this point, to respond without writing a novel. To keep it brief, I’d say that whether it’s a regressive tax depends on the structure or the tax rates. Here in the U.S., poor people most definitely do not own houses, or at least not houses in high-value locations on lot sizes anywhere near the lot sizes that rich people own. Only people with money own big lots in high-value locations, like desirable city centers.

          Our property tax system already contains terrible perverse incentives, such as taxing the value of land and buildings, which means that rich people can afford taxes on an expensive house, and middle-class people get slammed with taxes on additions and improvements to their houses.

          Poor people rent, and landlords have the same perverse inventive to avoid fixing up their properties. Their taxes are lower if they let their buildings decay, keeping them just above the condition the building code requires.

    • Wanderer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Why a land tax? Many (most? all?) towns and cities have a real estate tax.

      Good question because I think land value is important.

      Pretty much every country in the west has a housing shortage. There is no free land anywhere downtown so you can’t just take some land and build on it for free.

      With real estate tax. Let’s say you have 3 patches of land around the central railway station downtown. You have huge office building on one, you have a old, crappy by modern standard, home and you have a vacant lot that the owner can’t be bothered doing anything with. They all get taxed three different amounts. In fact by taxing them different amounts you are encouraging the market to devalue assets on that land to minimise their taxes.

      If taxes were based on the value of that land it would incenitivise you to maximise the space. So a 1 person home would end up paying 10x that of a 10 home apartment complex per home. Low cost housing would be cheaper, lavish estate homes would be costlier.

      If you want a market oriented fix to the housing crisis, to low density, to lack of public transport, for people buying land and sitting on it doing nothing, for rich people not paying taxes on thing and just holding onto wealth they have inherited. Then land value tax solves all these issues, or at least encourages it.

      (I still think corporations should be able to own homes. It’s a fantasy to expect the hosuing system to be better without it. But I does need fixing LVT is a way to help fix it).

  • BallsandBayonets@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Prohibit the owning of residential property by all non-individuals, and require individuals to have a minimum of a 70% minimum residency requirement on the one residential property they own.

    Age cap on all elected positions.

    The total elimination of all for-profit war manufacturing.

    A wealth cap set to some reasonable percentage above the poverty line.

    Immediate trials for crimes against humanity for all existing billionaires and most C-level employees of all energy, “defense”, pharmesutical, utility, media, and mass conglomerate corporations.

  • pearable@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    The vast majority of these will not come to pass if the government is not in active fear of revolutionary change. That is the only time they will be convinced to budge from the status quo.

    A similar thing happened in the 30s in the US. Most people don’t know that FDR was a trust fund kid and the inheritor of a fortune. The only reason he did the reforms was to prevent the country from going commie. Enough of the other capitalists fell in line. Those who didn’t, tried to install a military dictator, it’s called the Business Plot. Some of the smarter ones founded the John Birch Society, created various nonprofits, and selected religious leaders to empower with bags of cash. From there they slowly created the media, education, religious, and cultural right wing ecosystem that claimed the political system in the 70s.

    If we don’t want a similar claw-back of power we need to ensure it doesn’t happen again. We need to make sure no one is capable of corrupting media, education, religion, and culture at such a scale. I’d argue we need to eliminate the ability for people to own the means of production. After that is done almost every other problem we have as a society will be easier to manage.

  • umbrella@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    youd be better off making a plan to seize power.

    those measures are good and all but your current kings wont let it happen.