Originally Posted By: 4Salt
The Commons.

The commons were traditionally defined as the elements of the environment - forests, atmosphere, fisheries or grazing land - that we all share. These are the tangible and intangible aspects of the environment that no-one owns but everybody enjoys. There are other conceptions of the commons. Today, the commons need to be understood within the cultural sphere as well. The commons within this sphere include literature, music, performing arts, visual arts, design, film, video, television, radio, community arts and sites of heritage. The commons can also include ‘public goods’ such as public space, public education, health and the infrastructure that allows our society to function (such as electricity or water delivery systems). There also exists the ‘life commons’ – the human genome that makes us a unique species. Though a central government may ‘manage’ these, realistically we have inherited them and any governing body only holds them in trust for the public as well as future generations. The commons can also include the areas of human relationships such as the need for safety, trust, cooperation, shared intellect and so on. These are aspects of culture that our society shares and promotes a more functioning community.


That is what I was thinking but (maybe I am wrong) don't those that have the least use the commons the most (as said above)? Public Schools, Libraries, Health Systems, etc?

That is why it would seem a flat tax would be a better solution, those that have little pay little, etc.

Sure middle class families would miss out on some deductions but so would those that have the financial power to negate almost all of their taxes through various channels of legal sidestepping.

Maybe not, but that's how it looks to me.


Edited by Marz (04/13/10 06:44 PM)