RE: Taxation, Representation, and Negative Feedback
A very fascinating and thoughtful analysis, well presented.
As an ideological anarchist, I would accept this system because I refuse to participate in government, and pay (to the extent possible) zero taxes and have no desire whatsoever to "influence" those who pretend to "rule" me. My greatest desire would be for them all to simply leave me alone.
However, you core premise - a bad feedback loop - is so very clear, and you've made it so obvious in your article. I hope others may read and learn from this.
Although I am not a utopian, I have a lot of hope for the newly developed means and methodology for organizing societies in algorithmically defined, "positive" (in the sense of "good") ways. With your proposed negative feedback loops to keep things from destructive self-oscillating behavior. But if I am to participate, I demand that such participation be entirely voluntary.
Thanks for an outstanding article! :D
😄😇😄
Well, and that's where approaching things from a systems design would tell you that voluntary cooperation is like a one way valve -- it embraces and nourishes positive interactions, interactions in which both parties benefit and both parties approve of the outcome. Those are the interactions that we want society to be built on -- the win/win interactions.
What a voluntary society allows to die are the win/lose interactions, interactions that at least one participant wants to end. And (and this is the most important part for a healthy society) -- these interactions are allowed to die peacefully, without drama or confrontation. One party peacefully withdraws and the interactions ends.
It's like Gresham's law -- which most people only think of as running one way, which is that bad money drives out good. But Gresham's law only runs in this direction in the presence of monopoly, in the presence of forced interactions that people can't escape from, in the presence of legal tender laws.
But if legal tender laws aren't in effect, if we all have the freedom to accept good money but decline bad money, then good money drives out bad. Just like in the presence of forced societal interactions bad interactions can drive out good, but in the absence of forced societal interactions, good interactions drive out bad.
It all comes down to systems -- which is why I like the concept behind Steem -- it is built around the idea that systems can be stable and productive if the conditions are such that good interactions are rewarded and bad interactions are allowed to die.
I appreciate your insights into Gresham's law... I had not previously "connected the dots" to the underlying reasons for it presently working in the way that it does. You've made it clear that it's the monopolistic legal tender laws that have turned the world on its head. Thanks!