 |
| A Meme I made last night |
Some services are essential. I'm thinking of things like: Airline services to Canada's remote indigenous communities; services to provide food security, housing, healthcare, clothing; education, etc. Most of these services could be provided by many small, worker-owned, worker-managed, co-ops. Instead of bailing out and subsidizing humongous transnational corporations who have only enriched themselves and their shareholders while paying little or no taxes, government money should be used for start-up costs of small co-ops. Allowing oligopolies to control the food supply is no longer working; its not working for consumers who face shortages in the food supply as plants close, nor for producers who rely on these plants to purchase their goods. There are better alternatives. For instance, the butchers who traditionally only butcher deer or moose on the side during hunting season could increase both worker safety and food security by forming small butcher-owned, butcher-run co-ops. Such co-ops could better provide essential and other services in ways that are easily accessible to, and benefit the communities in which their members live and work.
No more shipping raw materials to distant off-shore factories so corporations can take our jobs to exploit the low wages, lax worker-safety and environmental standards of other countries, only to further pollute the environment by shipping our raw materials all the way back to us in the form of consumer goods for local consumption.No more broken supply chains, no more personal protection equipment shortages. All trade should benefit producers and consumers of both trade partners equally and fairly. Tariffs could be placed on all imports to remove any economic comparative advantage derived from underpaying, disrespecting, or disregarding the safety of workers and/or polluting the environment. Any revenues generated by such tariffs could be channelled back to those same countries, but to non-governmental workers' organizations and/or social organizations that promote the rights, freedom and well-being of people, especially people in countries exploited by unjust corporate practices. Workers in such countries should be producing to meet the needs of their own impoverished fellow citizens, not contributing to the over-consumption of people living in far-away wealthy countries.
The financial sector too needs a major overhaul. Instead of enriching only themselves --money making money with money without providing a good or service-- all banks and financial institutions should be replaced with community-based credit unions. No more currency speculation and tax evasion services for corporations and the uber-rich. A Tobin tax --a small 1% or less tax on all financial transactions-- could provide enough government revenue to eliminate many other forms of taxation. It would also eliminate currency speculation and reduce tax-avoidance. Everyone, big or small, would pay more or less 1% every time they put money into, or took money out of their account. Hardly a progressive tax, since the wealthy would pay the same 1 % as someone earning and spending $20,000 or $40,000 per year. (Someone earning $40,000 say, would pay a total of 2% if they didn't transfer money between accounts; 1 % when they bank earnings/profits and another 1 % when they withdrew money it to spend or invest it, for a total of $800 in taxes per year.) Similarly, someone moving millions of dollars to an off-shore tax haven would have to pay 1 % on that money, and another 1 % if they moved it back to the country of origin. Corporations could .no longer avoid paying taxes on its profits by transferring them to a subsidiary in another country with low or no corporate taxes without paying 1 % tax on the transfer. (Corporations often transfer their profits to out-of-country subsidiaries or parent company or tax havens so the can show a loss on the books in the country in which they make most of their profits, thus avoid paying taxes on those profits. Some even have the audacity to ask that government for bailout based on those losses, threatening thousands of job-losses if they don't get the bailout.) 1 % is a pretty minimal tax, but it is a lot more than many corporations are are paying now! Currency and stocks & bonds traders would be all but eliminated by a Tobin tax. They make their millions by trading currencies, bonds and stocks on the global market, often on very small margins (0.0002 or something) every time the value of these holding go up or down, thus increasing the volatility of the marketplace. Every time Trump tweets out the deregulation of an environmental protection measures, or Boeing grounds a fleet of airplanes, these speculators exploit the change in value of the stock/bond/currency, selling large amounts to further reduce the value, only to buy them all back again at bargain prices when they reach rock bottom before the market reaches equilibrium the next hour/day week. Some of this is completely automated using AI bots. A 1 % Tobin Tax would be greater than the small margins these traders operate on (they make their money by trading huge amounts on very small margins). A 1 % tax would put them pout of business, and force such speculators to get a real job, producing an actual good or providing an actual service that would benefit someone other than themselves. They'd still be part of the 1 % though. With a 1 % Tobin tax we'd all be part of the 1 %!
The idea is to build an new economic development model in which everyone can thrive. No more vulnerable populations. Environmental and social costs of doing business can not be externalized; an environmental deficit or practices that leave large sectors of the world's population vulnerable to pandemics or diseases or poverty cannot be tolerated. Instead of the pursuit of economic growth we must seek to limit growth to levels that sustain the environmental health of the bioshere --the true basis of every economy-- and enable all members of the global family to thrive. We'd all have to stay between the lines --between the dark green lines on this diagram depicting Kate Raworht's vision of a doughnut economic development model. (Click on the link in the caption to learn more.)
 |
| Doughnut Economics: Kate Raworth |
There are doubtlessly many more or even better ways to design and implement an inclusive economic development model that would allow us to all to thrive without destroying the basis of our economy --the ecosphere. I'd like to hear about them. The one we had wasn't working, and now its dead or dying, killed by COVID 19. It and cannot be resurrected. Those who wait are waiting in vain. There will be some death throws, but there will not be a second coming. However most governments seem unable to envision an alternative; they continue to invest immense amounts of resources on flogging this dead horse. Those of us who know better must come up with an alternative. The shorter we can make this transition, the less painful it will be. The time to act is now!!
--Stewart Vriesinga
