pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 5 replies \ @SimpleStacker 24 Oct \ parent \ on: CA proposes one-time 5% tax on billionaires Politics_And_Law
Actually no, I am not a neoliberal or a libertarian. But I actually live in California and I can see the destructiveness of their policies. Medicaid is a woefully inefficient system. The problem with California politicians and voters is they think that extracting from the rich is going to solve systemic problems related to system design and incentives. It's not.
Yeah but its a neoliberal/Libertarian line that taxing the rich more will result in them leaving and so we can't.
My response would be the rich should be taxed at a higher rate as they have benefited more from the economy, law and order, public services, environmental protections and property rights that the government provisions.
The inequality in the US now after decades of neoliberalism is appalling.
Adam Smith was inclined toward taxing the rich more as they can afford it and a highly unequal society is actually very inefficient, inequitable and ultimately wasteful of human potential.
Politically California is Democrat and so more inclined toward universal healthcare which the Trump administration is cutting back on, so this is their response.
The provision of healthcare in the US is an absolute mess- the most expensive and inequitable in the developed world.
Glad I live in New Zealand- the taxpayer funded provision of free universal healthcare and accident insurance in New Zealand, while not perfect, is massively more efficient, equitable and cost effective.
If not Medicaid how would you fix the US-California health system/s?
In my opinion free (taxpayer funded) universal public health care is a fundamental requirement for any civilised government to provide...but it appears Trump is cutting it while giving huge tax cuts to very wealthy people and California is responding accordingly as best they can.
reply
I'm not fundamentally against progressive tax rates.
I'm mostly commenting on the article itself, which says that "this wealth tax will work because it's a one time tax," which I think is a very foolish thing to say.
As to health care, I am supportive of a public/private model like Taiwan has. But the US healthcare sector has so many ingrained interests that I think it's basically impossible to reform without bloodshed at this point.
reply
yeah, the one-time thing is what caught my eye the most as well. I suppose it's fine if that's how it is described in the law, but using it as a justification is absurd.
reply
Seriously think the author just has stars in his eyes over things he wants to happen, but doesn't actually stop to think how it's perceived by others. It seems to be a common problem among progressives.
reply
I guess they are hoping Trumps attacks on Medicaid are a one time event as well?
Totally I agree the US healthcare system looks to be a tragic mess of chronic embedded cronys lobbying to maintain their rentseeking.
Within that terrible political dysfunction a one off tax on the rich seems like a viable option!
I pity the doctors, nurses and workers in the US system where money seems to trump the hypocratic oath.
Also agree a mixed model where you have decent free universal healthcare along with some private provision for those who can afford it is a reasonable balanced way to go although it leaves a tension between the two and lobbying by the private health providers to cut into the public system.
reply