this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2025
85 points (92.9% liked)
Asklemmy
47099 readers
1815 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There are plenty of governments that do that. Cuba, China, Vietnam, Korea, the late Soviet Union.
While Stalinist ultraleft economic policies were not so generous to small businesses, the new Chinese model (which has been adopted by most Socialist states, bar Korea, which hews still to the failed Stalinist model) focuses on nationalization of heavy industry (steel, aggregate, resource extraction, refinery) while allowing consumer goods and small-scale retail to remain in the hands of business owners.
The reason this doesn't happen in the West or its neocolonies is that it hampers the wealth and resource extraction of the international finance capital class.
Reading another comment. China doesnt tax the ultra rich, like the Post was asking for.
I also wonder if its a good solution to do. But reading that comment, reveals that taxing the ultra rich wont make the problem go away.
In Germany we have a party called "Die Linke" which wants to tax the ultra rich. But slowly I feel like thats a stupid idea when looking how China works.
China does tax the rich but they also have an additional system of "voluntary donations." For example, Tencent "volunteered" to give up an amount that is about 3/4th worth of its yearly profits to social programs.
I say "voluntary" because it's obviously not very voluntary. China's government has a party cell inside of Tencent as well as a "golden share" that allows it to act as a major shareholder. It basically has control over the company. These "donations" also go directly to government programs like poverty alleviation and not to a private charity group.
For clarity, China does tax the ultra-rich, they just don't try to solve the conditions that give rise to wealth inequality through taxation alone like the Nordic Countries do, but through vast and rapid development of the productive forces. The former method, if exclusively focused on, can end up lengthening the process, whereas it is through development of the productive forces that the conditions that give rise to wealth inequality can be truly ended for good.
Essentially, if 1 hour of labor in China can produce more on average than 1 hour of labor in, say, the US, then it becomes easier to fulfill the needs of all, while simultaneously preparing the ground for increasing the ratio of production in the public sector (which works best with large, massive firms, rather than smaller firms, which work best with markets). This is why Marx says markets erase their own foundations as they develop.