Taxing the rich is not the solution

In the course of discussions about the financing of an unconditional basic income, the taxation of rich and wealthy people is often mentioned; they should be taxed more heavily in order to achieve a necessary redistribution.



I think we are completely missing the point if we waste even a moment assuming that there is a need for better redistribution.

No, it doesn’t need redistribution.

We can’t just deal with treating symptoms and continue to ignore the causes that have led to this situation of the need for an unconditional basic income.

That would then be more or less the same mistake as when the first social achievements were introduced to alleviate people’s suffering a little. And yes, even if this may sound a bit harsh, one has to realise in retrospect that the developed welfare state was absolutely necessary until then – no question about it – and yet an unconditional basic income could have been created back then, even had to be, but this would have been clearly rejected by the political class then as well as today, because it is simply a question of power.

And who among the political parties would be prepared to stand up for an open democracy that could well replace the ruling party politics and thus end all political as well as economic dependencies from one day to the next?

Well, we will probably not be able to achieve that this way.

A dialogue with the existing system parties is therefore a wasted time, as they have fully understood the idea behind an unconditional basic income and therefore fear it.

Nobody wants the free and self-determined human being to exist, no, they want to continue to maintain the constraints and dependencies, at any price.

Because that is the easiest way to manipulate people, because it is very easy to play them off against each other.

You see this every day in political discourse, where some agitate against others, some campaign against others, some fight against others ideas and some vote against others.

There is no togetherness, no doing things together, no working on common solutions that will make everyone’s lives better.

Unfortunately, the common good does not come first here, but always only one’s own party interests and how one can best sell oneself to the outside world, because after the election is always before the next election.

And so we always go round in circles and only treat symptoms that sooner or later lead to even more problems.

To get back to the redistribution that was mentioned, one has to recognise the causes that lead to wealth.

Someone only gets rich by exploiting nature and people, there is no other way to get rich.

OK, gotcha.

Of course, you can also get rich by inheriting a fortune. True.

Nevertheless, this does not change the fact that poverty is also just a result of people exploiting other people.

And this is only possible because we live in a profit-oriented economic system.

This means that entrepreneurs are forced to make profits, and this is only possible by exploiting people and nature.

In practice, this means that many people earn as little money as possible so that others can make profits.

Put simply, this creates wealth on the one hand and poverty on the other.

The introduction of an unconditional basic income alone solves the problem of exploitation of human beings, but does not end the actual system behind it, which makes such a system necessary in the first place.

Now one only has to ask how long such a redistribution of the availability of existing higher incomes and capital will be in place to maintain the effect of redistribution.

I think that it will not last long, especially if one day it goes to the substance of the wealthy.

Therefore, a reorganisation of money creation should be seriously considered right from the start, because only a comprehensive monetary system reform would be able to solve the causes of all problems in this regard.

We should finally say goodbye to the profit-oriented economic system and concentrate on an economic system based on the common good of all, and this includes a money system that should not be born as credit debt, but in a positive sense as credit.

Why are you for the Universal Basic Income UBI+?
In order for me to publish your opinion here, all you have to do is send an email with the following subject:
"My opinion on the UBI" to

Thank you, every contribution is valuable.