If American countries are, like the Old Justice in the US Louis Brandeis once, “democratic laboratories,” then I have to take a closer look at what is happening in California right now.
The threat of rising taxes and the ‘rich intervention’ has led some wealthy people in the Golden State, including professionals, to turn to get out for cheap pastures like Austin or Miami. This has also raised concerns about a massive migration that could affect not only state taxes, but also the growth and technology that has made California the fifth largest economy in the world.
It’s very difficult. While no one today feels sorry for the rich or the business (see the appropriate recent outrage of ProPublica is dropping to show how the richest people in America pay taxes), or to have a strong belief in the economy, the threat of taxes and laws enforced by other countries is true.
The good news is that California is using creative thinking in these areas. What if there was an alternative way to save the company’s assets and the citizens could benefit all?
One such concept of popularity is what has become known as “pre-distribution.” In contrast to the redistribution mechanism, in which the government taxes existing resources and then uses them to promote various projects and developments, early distribution only involves spending the same amount as entrepreneurs, and using growing funds (as we know more than economic growth) to support public money.
The idea of allowing more people to own capital has been working for some time. The program of CalSavers software, created in 2016, allows people such as gigs or independent contractors who do not have access to retirement accounts to support government-run projects.
Likewise, Proposition 24, the California Privacy Act, was released last year and will take effect in 2023. This creates a kind of fund, in which 93 cents of every dollar raised by corporate fines for breach of confidentiality (which, due to the control of capitalism, should be large) can be invested and Treasure, as well as the proceeds of paying for government services. “It’s a way to keep us from tax evasion,” said Democrat Senate Robert Hertzberg.
He, along with some of California’s richest men such as former Google CEO Eric Schmidt and Snap founder Evan Spiegel, has come up with the idea. The idea is that seed donations from companies or charitable donors can be put into a fund that California people can use for things like work security, medical care and much more.
Meanwhile, in the 2021-2022 budget, Gavin Newsom, California’s ambassador to the United States, wants to spend more tax money this year – which, together with Covid’s relief, has increased. $ 100m in a public fund – starting college accounts for anyone earning less money from the government.
One might think the extreme is for the government to take a small share, perhaps 3-5%, at first, as a state Israel or Finland do it already. Given that the value of publicly traded companies in California is around $ 13tn, it is not a change for chump. If the government could have played a small role in the top corporations a few decades ago, there could be very little of the “Occupy” Silicon Valley vibe in California right now.
Fragmentation should not, in my opinion, be a tax replacement. It will not fill the void, and taxes in any case are a way to encourage people to develop and participate. But it should be seen as a new way of earning money especially well suited to the generation whose impact the network is intangible wealth Wealth is not just in the hands of a few, but in a few businesses that can bring in more profit with fewer partners.
It can also help integrate government and privacy initiatives with rewards. Most of the wealth that leading companies have probably is in the hands of ordinary people – good schools, proper infrastructure, basic research, and much more. As economists like Mariana Mazzucato frequent recognition, why do taxpayers take the money, say, put the fastest fibers without getting anything commercial?
Of course, if the publication has not yet taken place in the California laboratory, I hope it will be approved in some way to the federal government. The Obama administration tried to launch its nationwide CalSavers program, called myRA, but failed in some ways because the money was simply being invested in less secure financial institutions at a time when the market as a whole was growing rapidly.
Even in this political age, it is an idea whose time has come. Previous distribution has the support of some unexpected individuals such as the hedge funder Ray Dalio and left-wing economist Joseph Stiglitz. Perhaps it is because although it does not completely change the market, it promotes shared ownership: the combination of capitalism and socialism that is relevant in our time.
Source link
