Asklemmy

47151 readers

468 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

Why aren’t any government making wealth inequality and property supply focused policies? (lemm.ee)

submitted 1 week ago by WyckedKaos@lemm.ee to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

59 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Why can’t any government in the world aim to tax ultra rich more whilst making easier for small to medium large businesses to thrive. And policies on property supply rather than property buyers like all sorts of first time buyers programs.

Why are only same old policies keep being peddled when the world is still going to shit?

That doesn’t involve reducing the government size and budget entirely or subscribing to any extreme left or right?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] pcalau12i@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

China does tax the rich but they also have an additional system of "voluntary donations." For example, Tencent "volunteered" to give up an amount that is about 3/4th worth of its yearly profits to social programs.

I say "voluntary" because it's obviously not very voluntary. China's government has a party cell inside of Tencent as well as a "golden share" that allows it to act as a major shareholder. It basically has control over the company. These "donations" also go directly to government programs like poverty alleviation and not to a private charity group.