Think about what you’re saying. Nobody should be allowed to own anything? No books, no art, no jewelry, no anything. Because literally anything can be made to be luxury and become a store of value.
I have thought about what I’m saying. The problem is you don’t understand what I’m saying, but I did just kinda throw it out there with no explanation (because we’re on lemmy.ml, I didn’t think I needed to). I am referring to private property in the Marxian sense, where a distinction is made between private and personal property. All of the things you listed are personal property, not private property. In Marxian economics private property refers to the means of production privately owned and involved in an economic enterprise employing wage labor (i.e. factories, offices, farms) while personal property refers to consumer goods or goods produced by an individual (i.e. books, art, jewelry). What I was presenting as a solution is the abolishment of the former and not the latter, replacing private ownership instead with collective or public ownership (when workers share ownership of their tools and place of work - the means of production). This is the core idea of all anti-capitalist ideologies, though it was first articulated in this way by anarchists.
But without private property no one can accumulate wealth by exploiting the labor of others. I haven’t ruined the point of the wealth tax, I’ve preempted the need for it.
Think about what you’re saying. Nobody should be allowed to own anything? No books, no art, no jewelry, no anything. Because literally anything can be made to be luxury and become a store of value.
I have thought about what I’m saying. The problem is you don’t understand what I’m saying, but I did just kinda throw it out there with no explanation (because we’re on lemmy.ml, I didn’t think I needed to). I am referring to private property in the Marxian sense, where a distinction is made between private and personal property. All of the things you listed are personal property, not private property. In Marxian economics private property refers to the means of production privately owned and involved in an economic enterprise employing wage labor (i.e. factories, offices, farms) while personal property refers to consumer goods or goods produced by an individual (i.e. books, art, jewelry). What I was presenting as a solution is the abolishment of the former and not the latter, replacing private ownership instead with collective or public ownership (when workers share ownership of their tools and place of work - the means of production). This is the core idea of all anti-capitalist ideologies, though it was first articulated in this way by anarchists.
So you are making broad exceptions allowing the wealthy to buy, trade, and store their wealth there. You’ve ruined the entire point of the wealth tax.
But without private property no one can accumulate wealth by exploiting the labor of others. I haven’t ruined the point of the wealth tax, I’ve preempted the need for it.
A mean, maybe. Certainly we at least agree it’s a better idea than a wealth tax.