this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2021
13 points (100.0% liked)
Asklemmy
46264 readers
1141 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
How do you see this working to stop poverty? E.g. lowering taxes generally has reduced funding for public services needed by the poor. Contractual freedom works generally better for those who are in a better position to negotiate, i.e. those who are not poor.
If you have a bill to pay today, kids to feed today, to eat yourself today and are without cash, contractual freedom would drive you to slavery in a minute, wouldn't it?
I agree with this as a measure, however I can't see how it would level the playing field, given that the rich have been subsidised for decades. To level the playing field, you would need a strong inheritance tax for the top 1%, as well as mechanisms to reverse the re-distrubution to the top that we had going for 40 years.