287
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2023
287 points (98.6% liked)
Asklemmy
44152 readers
1393 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
Taxes can be a tool for taking unjustly gained capital and redistributing it to the people as a whole.
That does require workers exerting power through and over the state, but taxes are simply an exercise of power towards redistribution of resources.
Not really though. The workers don't control the state, the owners do. The workers can't actually use the state to advance their interests. Every concession given to them by the owners is a) only given if the alternative is revolution and b) rolled back as soon as possible. Once the workers take over the state, taxes no longer serve that purpose but instead serve the purpose of smoothing out the money supply to avoid hoarding and accumulation.
Yes, in theory it would be great if we could tax the rich, but history shows us that we cannot, and ultimately theory has shown us the same thing.