mozzaok
Gold Member
Offline
OzPolitic
Posts: 6741
Melbourne
Gender:
|
I agree with both of you.
Diametrically opposing views may not always be mutually exclusive.
I have long thought we need something to make our whole society fairer, a system that provides incentives to do the right thing, and punishment for doing the wrong thing, and as money is the single constant that everybody in the society shares, incorporating some "equalising" via taxation seems a valid option.
I call it a "Citizenship Quotient" when I think about it, and for brevity's sake will refer to it as "CQ", from now on.
Every time I hear people talking on the telly, or radio, about how people need to be made more accountable, I think of how my CQ idea could make that happen. The basic principle is that anti-social behaviour earns you demerits off your CQ, and good behaviour earns you credits.
I figure it could kick in from about age fourteen, and teens who misbehave would lose points, and you have to have a certain number of points before you are allowed to drive, or go to pubs, and clubs, which would be a big incentive for teens to behave.
Now for society as a whole, your CQ would then be used to assess how much you pay for government services, and those with high points would get discounts on their rates, and rego and all that sort of stuff, as well as penalty percentage points added to your normal tax rate.
Where this kicks in as relevant to Sennex and Jaemi's posts is that millionaires who just take take take from society, would have a lower CQ than those who are active contributors, and may be generous to charity, or employ special needs, people, or anything that is seen as providing a good outcome to our society as a whole.
With a system like that we would see an active incentive, and deterrent system which could make a difference to how people actually live their lives.
Criminals, when they get out of jail, would need to do volunteer work, and display a positive attitude to society to get their CQ up, and the miilionaire who doesn't give two hoots about a $200 speeding fine may think twice if it meant say .5% extra tax he has to pay, so the deterrents and rewards would be relative, and relevant, across all spectrums in our society.
It is just something I have been thinking about lately, so what do you guys reckon?
Do you think it is a good idea, or do you see pitfalls that would make it unworkable?
I really think it could be a massive positive for our society as a whole, and I think individuals would start to benefit as well when they see the rewards of a cohesive functioning society working together towards the commom goal of making this a better, more peaceful society for all. Of course it would take a lot of tweaking to find appropriaste CQ's for every situstion, , but that is just mecdhanics, I really think the principle is sound.
Anyone have any similiar, or better ideas ?
|