Through watching the more recent political debates, I have recently begun to come into contact with some ideas of reform that I approve of.
One of these is a higher tax rate for the wealthy. Something like this has already begun in France, where they just raised the tax rate for the wealthy to an astounding 75%. (click here for article) If we had a higher tax on the wealthy, that could bring in much more money to the government, thus allowing them to create and maintain social welfare programs as well as create new ones. Hasn't it been proven as of late that the trickle-down-effect doesn't work? The sad thing is that people who are extremely rich aren't always philanthropic, but are also greedy and mainly concerned with sustaining their wealth, even if it means firing a few good employees to keep their pockets overflowing. Couldn't more good come from giving the money from the rich to the government so that they can act like a surrogate Robin Hood than allowing the rich to keep it all for themselves?
Another of these is the German government's way of campaigning. They allow only a certain amount of money to each candidate, and they only allow them to campaign for a few months. If this was allowed and applied to the American government, the "average Joe" could effectively run for President and actually change the country for the better. Couldn't that help our country too, by eliminating political machines? Wouldn't it also allow candidates to say what they truly believed instead of forcing themselves to believe a political party's beliefs? That would allow each person to be judged through their own merits and ideas instead of a political party agenda. Wouldn't that make for a better country?
Great post, I love how you pose questions for your readers! It is interesting to consider the idea of publicly funded campaigns and what that means.
ReplyDelete