This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
For what it's worth, when I last saw this, the gap had grown immensely in the last 10 or 15 years. It was quite surprising, as I haven't really noticed it in German society (where I live, but I'm in a rich city).
Although I think I saw income inequality. The hope would be that it's somewhat reversible, as I think (too much) inequality is bad for a society. OTOH, I pay quite a lot in taxes already, so it's not too clear to me how thing will improve. Higher minimum wage / whatever Harz-4 is called now?
High property taxes on large central city apartments would be one way to drive down wealth inequality, as that is one thing which all wealthy people want that they can't easily hide.
I'd also propose the following for inheritance taxes: The government gets 1 "share" of your inheritance. For example, if you have 1 heir, the government would get half. If you have 2 heirs, the government would get one third. With 10 heirs, they would get 1/11th. Although this proposal would possibly lower overall inheritance taxes, it would also incentive the rapid dissolution of large fortunes. Wealthy families used to have more children than now. This is one factor in increasing wealth inequality.
It's also worth pointing out that ideas to reduce inequality without reducing overall quality of life probably won't work. Wealth inequality almost always goes up except for in times of major disaster (Great Depression, WWII, Communist revolution, etc...).
What definitely doesn't work is high income and business taxes. They merely ensure that the existing elite is not challenged by upstarts, although it might narrow the gap between middle and low. When talking about inequality, it is the 0.1% that is the largest driver of distortions. They need to be challenged directly. Instead what we get is insane taxes and regulation on a small business whose owner makes $500,000/year.
While I'm not sure your exact proposal is the way, I do think inheritance taxes are both a good way to reduce inequality, and are also, honestly, democratic (even playing field). That said, they do go against human nature to give something to your kids, so I think you need to be careful. (Yes, I know trusts are a standard way to work around them; it seems like if this is known, a counter-play should be possible). I say this as someone intending to leave something (but not too much :D) to his kids.
Agreement on the expensive real estate. Also, especially anything more than a single home should be hit fairly hard, IMO.
More options
Context Copy link
This is an interesting idea that would also have some eugenic effects. I have often wondered how to incentivise rich people to have more children.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link