I think it important to distinguish between a free trade market, which should be largely unregulated. People should be able to buy and sell goods on an open market.
Capital markets, or ownership and control of wealth should be heavily regulated.
Huh, what’s interesting about this is that you’ve basically arrived at a communist/anarchist idea on your own, but are describing it using Libertarian / Neoliberal Capitalist terminology. You’re describing different types of property and saying that one type should be regulated and the other type shouldn’t. Anti-capitalists distinguish between private property (the means of production privately owned and involved in an economic enterprise employing wage labor (i.e. factories, offices, farms)) and personal property (consumer goods or goods produced by an individual (i.e. books, art, jewelry)), and believe that the former should be abolished (or one could say regulated to require collective ownership of such property by the workers) while the latter should be unregulated or lightly regulated.
In short, you’ve independently come to the same conclusion that anarchists and communists came to, but are describing it in a strange way.
I am not well versed in the terminology of Marx, but I do think given the age, it can do with some updating for modern times.
I am not sure you need to distinguish between private and personal property.
I think how I would describe it, is that you get physical goods and services that should be largely unregulated. First order trade.
But when it comes to derived or abstracted goods, like shares, investments, currencies, they should be regulated to ensure they stay closely tied to the physical assets they represent.
In terms of property, I do see some issues when as automation and knowledge becomes more prominent as a means of production, we will need to switch to a different way of thinking.
Something along the lines where knowledge becomes public domain knowledge much sooner than under current laws.
Then approaching taxation of private property and corporations differently, where they are taxed based on the value of assets. You would also stop taxing on revenue and profit. This way they will always have and incentive to make sure they are using assets effectively, or selling it and not just squat on it, to prevent others from having it. Those taxes would then be used to fund universal basic income.
Huh, what’s interesting about this is that you’ve basically arrived at a communist/anarchist idea on your own, but are describing it using Libertarian / Neoliberal Capitalist terminology. You’re describing different types of property and saying that one type should be regulated and the other type shouldn’t. Anti-capitalists distinguish between private property (the means of production privately owned and involved in an economic enterprise employing wage labor (i.e. factories, offices, farms)) and personal property (consumer goods or goods produced by an individual (i.e. books, art, jewelry)), and believe that the former should be abolished (or one could say regulated to require collective ownership of such property by the workers) while the latter should be unregulated or lightly regulated.
In short, you’ve independently come to the same conclusion that anarchists and communists came to, but are describing it in a strange way.
I am not well versed in the terminology of Marx, but I do think given the age, it can do with some updating for modern times.
I am not sure you need to distinguish between private and personal property.
I think how I would describe it, is that you get physical goods and services that should be largely unregulated. First order trade.
But when it comes to derived or abstracted goods, like shares, investments, currencies, they should be regulated to ensure they stay closely tied to the physical assets they represent.
In terms of property, I do see some issues when as automation and knowledge becomes more prominent as a means of production, we will need to switch to a different way of thinking.
Something along the lines where knowledge becomes public domain knowledge much sooner than under current laws.
Then approaching taxation of private property and corporations differently, where they are taxed based on the value of assets. You would also stop taxing on revenue and profit. This way they will always have and incentive to make sure they are using assets effectively, or selling it and not just squat on it, to prevent others from having it. Those taxes would then be used to fund universal basic income.