From my perspective I am reality based; living in a society with constant financial manipulation to benefit some, and take from others. I see your perspective as intolerant of any and all government manipulation, not reality based since it is happening every day in every sector. I'm for changing the economic manipulation to benefit the majority, and those that need it most. I see your arguments as defending the status quo because change would require more regulation, where I see it as different regulation.
Well I don't know where it fits on this thread's ideology, but how about the idea of making all individual's financial records more public? Sort of like income statements (#1 below) and balance sheets (#2 below) for individuals. For example,
1. Every US individual's tax returns would be public record as soon as feasible.
Advantages -
A) potentially reduce tax fraud,
B) pressure the IRS to go after tax dodgers,
C) pressure congress to change the tax code such that it actually hits the wealthy more than the non-wealthy,
D) let everybody know where they stand on the income ladder,
E) people that want to marry for money will know who the best targets are!
Disadvantages,
A) loss of secrecy/privacy. I say too bad, that's the cost of earning money. You can be as private as you want with your emotions, personal relationship, family issues, or whatever. But wealth is a tool for interacting with others through commerce. If you want to interact with the general public, this just makes that interation more public. Hopefully it leads to less cheating, less inequity, and has the same affect on individuals that SEC filings have on companies (keeps them honest). Those individuals that value their privacy too much to reveal that they earned $200k last year, well they can do their best to not earn $200k.
2. Every US individuals assets should be public knowledge, to the extent feasible. This is more tough, but bank account balances, trusts, property ownership, etc. should all be a matter of public record.
This one is harder to implement, since some assets might be difficult to track, but conceptually its easy to understand. Everybody knows what everybody else is worth.
Advantages,
A) We would all have greater knowledge of each other's financial status. You can adjust your behavior accordingly (ie, don't have an impulse marriage with someone who has $150k in college debt, if that matters to you, wives would know if husbands are gambling away the nest egg every year!)
B) If someone thought to be in good shape began heading down the path to bankruptcy, hopefully someone in his peer group will help him before he drives the financial car over the cliff. Much harder to ignore personal financial problems when they are as public as it is to ignore a DUI (everybody knows when one of their friends gets a DUI).
Disadvantages,
A) People would react strangely at first as they find out some of their friends are multimillionaires (or almost bankrupt!), but over time society would adapt. The novelty of knowing exactly what someone is worth would fade over time. In fact, probably the pressure to stay in "GOOD" financial shape would increase, which would be good for the society overall.
B) Not really sure what would disadvantage society if everyone knew what everyone else is worth.
I'm sure Tim disapproves of this idea just because it is a new government imposed regulation. It would be nice if he could talk about the regulation on its own merits, rather that just oppose everything because its a regulation, and not a newfound individual freedom.
Whattaya think? How would significantly increased transparency into every individual's financial progress (annual taxes) and status (asset disclosure) hurt or help a society? That's pretty much the question? |
