Taxation in a Holistic-Futuristic Economy

Due to the complexity of the actual issue, I’ll only be able to talk on a surface level which is why this entry is going to be quite short

I made this picture on photoshop, because why not


Taxation is an issue which is essential to any political system, therefore it comes to no surprise that I have to talk about it as well. It won’t be much, as I’ve said in the short description in the title, but I love to talk about it and think that a little insight is helpful.

Without any further ado, I shall begin now.

What You Can Expect

As you know from the manuscript I released about my ideology, social policies and environmentalism play a key role. The first one means that there needs to be a strong social security net, high-quality healthcare accessible to everyone (universal healthcare) and – in Europe – a healthline that strengthens and benefits all participants, and else.
Environmentalism is not just about regulations and prohibition of certain ecologically damaging materials either; for instance, the government needs to invest in green technology and fusion/nuclear energy. Moreover, the infrastructure for electric and/or hydrogen cars must be built as well, thus old streets need to be still maintained and repaired, but new service stations have to be built. Not to mention that public research and scientific institutions should also receive greater support.

Depending on the size of your country, the taxation may be as high as in Scandinavian nations. There’s a lot to pay, but in return you get services like education and healthcare at excellent quality and you do not have to worry about being stuck with medical debt or not being able to get the job you want (e.g. higher education accessible to everyone). Furthermore, the nursing homes need to be stronger funded to both support the elderly who have worked all their life and the caregivers who ensure that they are being treated well. Those without a job shouldn’t have to suffer the consequences (e.g. social isolation due to less money available) and helped through unemployment insurance as well as agencies and institution which show the individual a way to get a new job (i.e. re-education programs to learn a new job) or learn new skills to get an old job back that was lost due to the changing requirements (e.g. automation).

In order to make that all possible, a wealth tax needs to be introduced:

  • Wealth tax is a tax levied on the value of held assets
  • A wealth tax is applicable to a variety of asset types including cash, bank deposits, shares, fixed assets, personal cars, assessed value of real property, pension plans, money funds, owner-occupied housing, and trusts
  • France, Portugal, and Spain all have wealth taxes

All of these assets can be taxed differently and depending on the circumstances, because as the article points out: „A farmer who earns little but whose land is highly valued, for example, may have trouble coming up with the money to pay a wealth tax.“
Hence it is important to have an honest and constructive discussion about it. The distribution of wealth benefits society overall and if the capital keeps flowing, then there’s no chance of wealth accumulation by a few. And sure, some may say that it will discourage any accumulation of wealth and could stop market growth, and to them I say:

A) The current system, which centers around profit maximization, creates the incentive of accumulating as much wealth as possible in the first place and leads to the various inequality issues we see today. Instead of focusing on endless economic growth (which isn’t possible in a world with finite resources) and profit maximization (which also incentives companies to pay their workers less and use more than questionable sources for their materials), a sustainable system and the well-being of the people should play the biggest role. It also won’t stop economic growth entirely – it may be slowed down, but that is to be expected when the priorities shift – since the incentive to gather a bit more wealth than others to buy certain goods will still exist. It is just not going to exist in the excessive way it currently is.
B) Market growth is still going to occur, but just at a lower pace. And I don’t see whats wrong with it: do you prefer a slow and stable market growth over decades, or a quick market growth which – in case of a Great Depression (2007-2009 and 1929) – destroys the wealth of millions of people? This steps also needs to be done to allow third world countries to flourish, at the moment they are mostly being used as places for cheap labour and resource warehouses for the wealthier countries.

It doesn’t stop there, of course. If tax loopholes are being closed and international treaties and organisations made to combat tax evasion, then some taxes will surely be able to be reduced or some entirely cut – as I stated previously, though, I can’t go into specifics here because the tax codes are quite large and I’m only able to say what may happen. Experts are needed here, that’s for sure.

Tax Idea: Flexible Taxes

The tax plan is based on Bernie Sander’s, except for the local-natinal-international companies which signals that distinctions
will be made. Additionally: the -2% is also just an example, not an actual proposal.

No human-made system is completely free from a potential crisis, from severe to mild, therefore I worked on a tax plan which is able to react to the ever-changing world around us. As you can see, in this hypothetical scenario the income brackets are being taxed less while the crisis is still going on without the government having to pass extra legislation or laws for that to happen. If more money is available, then the people may spend more and thus prevent a larger crisis from happening (i.e. downwards spiral). Companies are going to have more money at hand as well, and while it will not magically return to investments, it may help the business in one way or another. The proposed wealth tax can also be subject to a very small change, but that is up to discussion as the others.

I’m not familiar with the taxation of businesses in other countries, but in Germany we differ between „Kleinst-, Klein-, Mittel- und Großunternehmen“ („smallest, small, middle-sized and large corporations“) when it comes to taxation and other things. That makes sense, obviously, but just that you know what the simplified flexible tax plans wants to tell.


  • Much of the goals of holistic-futurism will require a tax increase on the wealthy and closing of loopholes on a national level and preventing tax evasion on an international level through treaties
  • The taxes may be as high as in Scandinavian countries, but in return the citizens have universally access to education, healthcare, transportation, and much more
  • A wealth tax is required to distribute the accumulated wealth and thus eliminate poverty, as well as funding the various programs
  • Incentives are not being abolished: if one wants to buy more luxury goods, he/she will be able to do that by working more or found a new business
  • Profit maximization and economic growth: the first is to be abolished, the latter not as important (sustainability and the well-being of the people need to be the focus of the body politics, economic growth isn’t neglected and still overseen)
  • The flexibility tax may be of some use and doesn’t require the government to pass a change to the tax code as soon as there’s a crisis

Veröffentlicht von thomasbaroque

Ich schreibe über politische, wirtschaftliche und wissenschaftliche Themen. Meine eigenen politischen Ziele ebenso. / I write about politics, the economy and science (my English isn't that good, though). My own political goals and ideas as well.

Kommentar verfassen

Trage deine Daten unten ein oder klicke ein Icon um dich einzuloggen:

Du kommentierst mit deinem Abmelden /  Ändern )


Du kommentierst mit deinem Facebook-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )

Verbinde mit %s

%d Bloggern gefällt das: