Comment Re: So this is actual profit (Score 1) 99
There are several, actually.
But first let me note that we do give people "money for nothing" - how else do you explain all the billionaires? You're not seriously suggesting that any one single person is 1,000,000 more efficient or productive than the avenge? If not, wjy do they earn that much?
Also, we've given away money for nothing e.g. during Covid, and also other forms of gigantic subsidies on other occasions - just not to poor peole, but to corporations, i.e. those that already have enough.
Which brings me to the most important change we would have to implement: a mechanism for moving wealth down from the super rich back down. It's the unequal distribution of wealth that generates stagnant wages and recors profits, and also high prices on housing and real.estate. There are a myriad of mechanisms to give away government money to rich people. All the while government money comes from taxes, and taxes are paid predominantly by the average. Bht there's close.to zero mechanism to bring money back.
Even thinga like.UBI and social welfare, if implemented "on top" of the current system, would actually shift wealth uphill (we're going to finance it by yaxes, paid ny the middle class; and you're going to spend it all in rent and groceries, moving it to shareholders and owners of bing corporations).
We could tax ownership above a certain threshold (say, above $50m?) by 5-10% yearly. Or we could tax income above, say, $5-10m yearly by 90% or even higher. The mechanism doesn't matter, the important part.is that wealth flow mechanism must be in balance towards more flat distributions, hot tilted towards one side.
Alternatively we could revive various negative-interest monetary systems, e.g. the one of Sylvio Gesell at the beginning.of the 20th century, which inherently don't have the wealth distribution problem.
One way or another, the central pivoting point is uniformity of wealth distribution.