Wealth and Income Tax Reform
Modest Wealth Tax (1–2%) on Top 1–2%
A wealth tax of 1–2% on the top 1–2% of Americans would generate hundreds of billions in revenue annually, targeting dormant capital while avoiding disruption of productive investment. With the top 1% holding more wealth than the bottom 90% combined, this tax would help counterbalance systemic inequality without discouraging entrepreneurship.
Income Tax Hike (2–4%) on Top 10–20%
Increasing income tax rates by 2–4 percentage points on the top earners ensures those who gain most from the system reinvest in its health. This group currently benefits from historic wealth appreciation, globalization, and tax avoidance schemes. Modest rate hikes restore balance and fund essential services.
Targeted Spending Cuts
Cap Non-Essential Cuts at 10%
A 10% reduction in discretionary spending (excluding Social Security and healthcare) would streamline government without harming the social safety net. Defense, corporate subsidies, and bureaucracy can absorb smart cuts through modernization and oversight. Social Security and healthcare should be treated as independent programs with their own sustainability paths.
Close Wealth Borrowing Loophole
Tax Personal Consumption Borrowed Against Assets
The ultra-wealthy often borrow against investments to avoid capital gains tax. A progressive consumption tax on borrowed funds used for personal spending closes this loophole, ensuring wealth consumption is taxed fairly, just as working-class consumption is.
Fiscal Discipline Through GDP-Based Budgeting
Anchor Spending to GDP Ratios
Fixing discretionary spending categories as percentages of GDP stabilizes government finances. For example, defense might remain at 3.5% of GDP annually. Congress retains override power during recessions or emergencies. This mechanism minimizes debt-ceiling brinkmanship while allowing automatic fiscal discipline.
Targeted Support for Low-Income Americans
$100 Stipend + $100 in Food Aid
Individuals earning below the median income would receive $100 monthly in cash and $100 in food assistance. This modest supplement reduces economic pressure without bloating the budget. It also avoids the inefficiency of universal basic income by targeting those most in need.
Work Requirements
Requiring part-time work, job training, or volunteer service reinforces the principle of mutual responsibility and maintains political support across the ideological spectrum.
Student Loan Reform
Income-Based Repayment System
Replace student loans with a policy where graduates pay 5–10% of their income for 10 years. The government provides colleges with the net present value of future graduate contributions, incentivizing institutions to prioritize economic value.
Curriculum Reform
Require basic foundational courses while encouraging colleges to align degree programs with real-world economic needs. This avoids overproduction in low-demand fields and raises the value of postsecondary education.
Health Care Reform
Cost Containment Before Expansion
Other nations cover everyone at half the U.S. cost. We must first adopt cost control via:
- Expanding Medicare-style price negotiation to all payers
- Capping administrative costs
- Converting insurance companies into regulated nonprofits
Universal coverage is only feasible if we address these root inefficiencies first. Without cost control, expansion could bankrupt the system.
Election Structure Reform
Replace Plurality Voting with RCV or STAR
The current winner-take-all voting model fuels polarization and discourages new ideas.
- Ranked Choice Voting (RCV): Voters rank candidates, and instant runoffs ensure winners have broad support.
- STAR Voting: Voters score candidates, and the top two enter a runoff where majority support prevails.
These systems reduce spoilers, empower moderates, and foster coalition building.
Campaign Finance Reform
Restore Voter Trust and Reduce Corruption
- Publicly finance campaigns to reduce big donor influence
- Cap political donations and independent expenditures
- Close loopholes for Super PACs and dark money
- Require real-time disclosure of political spending
These measures are essential to ensure democratic legitimacy and reduce regulatory capture.
Housing Access and Regulation
Boarding Houses and Micro-Housing Development
Encourage the development of communal housing with private rooms and shared amenities, priced at 1/3 of residents’ income. This model supports workforce housing in cities and dignified shelter for low-income individuals and families. Government can support via zoning reform, low-interest loans, and public-private partnerships.
Limit Property Accumulation
- Primary residences are tax-exempt
- Second homes taxed at 10% of income produced
- Third at 20%, and increasing to 90% for excess holdings
- Foreign ownership of residential real estate prohibited
These measures prevent speculative hoarding and prioritize housing for residents.
Incentivize Vertical Development
Apply per-building taxes to apartment complexes to encourage vertical over horizontal development, improving density and affordability.
Illegal Immigration and Labor Reform
Rational, Humane, and Enforceable Framework
- Raise minimum wage to $12.50/hour—a historic average that balances inflationary risk with humane compensation
- Cap undocumented worker pay at the same minimum wage
- Grant two-year window for undocumented immigrants to register as guest workers
- Allow employers to house and provide medical care to guest workers
- Enforce E-Verify nationally
- Defer wall construction, but keep the option if enforcement fails
- No constitutional rights or voting privileges for guest workers
- Maintain birthright citizenship, unless legally reconsidered
This balances market need, compassion, and enforcement. It stabilizes immigration flows and protects American labor.
Conclusion
This policy framework reflects a comprehensive and integrated approach to 21st-century governance. It emphasizes:
- Fiscal sustainability
- Economic fairness
- Regulatory discipline
- Political reform
- Social safety without dependency
It bridges partisan divides by rooting each proposal in practical benefits, fairness, and systemic integrity.
We cannot address 21st-century challenges with 20th-century thinking. Restoring the “policy” in politics starts with vision, courage, and a return to principled pragmatism.
-### **Treat Guns Like Cars – Within Reason**Treating guns like cars offers a regulatory framework that balances rights with responsibility.*
**Driver’s License = Firearm License**: You need a license to operate a car after passing written and practical tests. Requiring gun owners to pass safety and competency tests could reduce accidental shootings (approx. 500 per year in the U.S.).*
**Vehicle Registration = Firearm Registration**: Cars must be registered and renewed periodically. A similar model for firearms could help trace weapons used in crimes—important since over **200,000 guns are stolen each year** in the U.S.*
**Insurance**: Auto liability insurance incentivizes safer behavior. Firearm liability insurance could create market-based pressure for secure storage and safe use.>
**Note**: We don’t register cars solely because they’re dangerous but because they’re used in public and have major third-party risks. Guns kept at home for self-defense may not need the same oversight as concealed carry.
—### **Social Security Reform – Shared Sacrifice, Smarter Strategy
**1. **Lift the Payroll Tax Cap** Currently, only income up to **\$168,600 (2024)** is taxed for Social Security. This means someone making \$1M pays the same Social Security tax as someone making \$168k. * **Effect**: Removing the cap could **eliminate 73%** of the projected long-term Social Security funding gap (CRFB, 2023). * It also helps restore fairness; over 90% of earners pay on all their income while the top 5–10% do not.
2. **Modest Benefit Cuts for High Earners** Cutting Social Security benefits by 10% for the top 20% of earners would save money without harming low-income retirees. * Top earners typically have other retirement income streams (401(k)s, IRAs, investments). * The Social Security Administration estimates that **higher-income retirees rely on Social Security for only \~20%** of their income, compared to **90% for low-income seniors**.
3. **Increase Payroll Tax by 2 Percentage Points** The current combined payroll tax rate is **12.4% (6.2% employer, 6.2% employee)**. Raising this to **14.4%** would gradually and broadly shore up the trust fund. * Cost for median income worker (\~\$60k/year): \~\$600/year more. * Would **close around 44% of the solvency gap** if phased in slowly (SSA data).
4.**Invest in Real Estate Rental Funds** Currently, Social Security Trust Funds are invested solely in low-yield Treasury bonds. * Real estate, particularly residential rentals, provides **3–5% annual returns**, plus inflation protection. * A **diversified investment strategy** (like Canada’s pension plan) could yield higrher long-term returns, improving sustainability. * For example, **the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB)** invests in infrastructure and global real estate and earned an average **10-year return of 9.6%** (as of 2023).—
….
The Correlation Between Union Power and Income Inequality
In contemporary American political discourse, the issues of income inequality and the role of labor unions are often debated, with a growing number of voices arguing for a stronger correlation between the two. As illustrated in a recent social media post from Robert Reich, historical data suggests a powerful inverse relationship: as union membership in the United States has declined, the share of national income held by the wealthiest 10 percent has steadily increased. This trend suggests that the weakening of labor unions has been a significant factor in the widening of the wealth gap.
Historically, labor unions served as a crucial counterbalance to corporate power. By organizing and bargaining collectively, unions were able to secure higher wages, better benefits, and safer working conditions for their members. This collective action not only benefited union workers but also exerted upward pressure on wages in non-unionized sectors, as companies sought to remain competitive in the labor market. The graph in question shows that during the period when union membership was at its peak—from the mid-20th century into the 1970s—the share of national income going to the top 10 percent was at its lowest. This period is often referred to as the “golden age” of the American middle class, characterized by broad-based prosperity and reduced income disparity.
However, starting in the latter half of the 20th century, union membership began a long-term decline due to a combination of factors, including political opposition, anti-union legislation, and shifts in the American economy from manufacturing to services. Coincidentally, as union power waned, the share of national income captured by the wealthiest Americans began a sharp ascent. This parallel trend suggests that without the negotiating power of unions, a larger portion of the wealth generated by the economy has flowed to the top, rather than being distributed more broadly to workers.
The argument, therefore, is that a robust union presence is not merely a matter of protecting workers’ rights but is essential for maintaining a more equitable society. If the goal is to address the growing issue of income inequality, then rebuilding and strengthening labor unions may be a critical step. Advocates of this view argue that empowering workers to bargain for a fairer share of profits could help reverse the trend of widening disparity, re-establish a strong middle class, and create a more balanced and just economic system. The graph serves as a powerful piece of evidence in this argument, suggesting that the path to a more equal society may lie in a return to the principles of collective action and worker solidarity that defined a previous era.
The Law of Love 