This idea has been kicking around in my head for a while, and I’m hoping some Lemmy geniuses can poke holes/ flesh it out with me.

Every person I’ve ever heard of works for and gets paid by some form of company. So instead of the company paying the workers and then those workers getting taxed, why not just tax it all to the corporations to begin with? Instead of hundreds of millions of individuals to think about, the IRS (in US) could just focus on a few million companies.

We the people democratically decide what we think is needed for a functioning society, and charge it to the corporations.

I’d say each company should be responsible for paying the same percentage of the bill as percentage of total “profits” they made. Like, if Apple makes 10% of all the combined profits of all the companies this quarter, they are responsible for paying 10% of the bill. Highest paid employee can make 10x what the lowest paid employee (including contracted and foreign workers) makes; more than that gets included in the calculation as part of the company’s “profits”. (So that CEO can still get paid absurd amounts of money, but the company will still pay taxes on most of it)

What if we created some sort of secure opinion/voting app where people go to cast their vote on whatever people think needs to be voted on. Should there be UBI? Should it be a token, living, or thriving wage? (Personally, I’d go with thriving and tie it to inflation) Single payer healthcare? All education paid for? Stop funding genocide? No more polluting the planet, or at least force companies to pay to clean up their own messes? When and where are companies allowed to market to us? Where should the threshold of agreement be to enact changes, 40% 50%+1 60%? Etc etc

Then we elect people who agree to simply enact what the people democratically agree on… And if the people don’t agree, they’ll stay away from it or leave it to the states. And hopefully someday we could build it out so that state and local governments work this way too.

I think we get bogged down on the 2 or 3 things we disagree on and allow that to mean we never get the things we DO agree on. Let’s get the things we agree on first, and then continue debating the things we disagree on.

Also I think this would be a long term plan. 12 years would give us 2 full election cycles here in the US and would give zoomers time to grow up, settle, and start to really vote (hopefully with this new system).

Anyway, like I said, let’s poke holes and figure out solutions. Thanks

  • Wes4Humanity@lemm.eeOP
    2·
    7 months ago

    What if we taxed companies that wanted to do business in the US regardless of where they put their head quarters?

    I certainly can’t argue that I know the solution. I don’t know much about programming and tech in general.

    Also the app, at least as I envision it, wouldn’t replace actual voting… You’d still have to vote for the people who agree to do what the app says… We’d just want the app to accurately portray what people actually agree on… But you’re right, it would still need to be pretty secure to avoid double voting and such

    • CameronDev@programming.dev
      2·
      7 months ago

      International tax is very tricky, and I am not an expert. If a company is based in A, and sells a product to a person in B, which country should do the taxation? If both countries claim that the tax should apply to them, the company is going to get double taxed. Currently (afaik, and im not an expert), but almost all countries currently accept that A gets to tax the company. To switch it around would require every country to agree to the alternate method. And there are likely other issues, such as encouraging companies to offshore their production to 3rd world countries, which then dont even get to tax the company if the product isnt sold to their own citizens.

      Your app seems like it has its purpose already partially served by opinion polling companies. They give an insight into what the general population would like to happen. Bear in mind that these polling companies can still introduce bias into their results, so arent completely to be trusted.

      Its worth noting that direct democracy also has its failings. Just because a majority want something, it doesnt necessarily mean its a good idea, for either the country or the people. No one likes taxes, but a country with no tax ends up in a bad state. No one likes going to war, but sometimes it is the morally correct thing to do.