Progressive taxation is the method of taxation through which the percentage of taxes you must pay increases with the wealth you have. This idea is championed by centrists, moderates, post-ideologues, and social democrats alike- yet its effectiveness has proven to be debatable, especially as it applies in free-market economies and the privatization of would-be governmental services. Its core idea rests in the belief that doing so can allow for universal welfare and ensure the essential needs of all is met; but this idea is also flawed, as all it does is allow for the further commodification of labour under the capitalist system. Furthermore we’ve seen time and time again how these progressive taxes simply magnify the inequality inherent in inegalitarian societies of the modern era. Understanding the failures and short-coming of these reformist behaviours allows us to better understand the role of revolution in securing a better future, as well as the prerequisites which allow for the conditions for such a revolution – social, political, and economic – to prosper.
To understand the way in which these taxes embrace the commodification of labour, we must first define a commodity; Marx defines a commodity as any thing which has a use, and that use as well as its rarity defines its use-value (which I assign the term ‘worth’ in reference to) as well as its exchange-value (which I assign the term ‘value’ in reference to)
Being that the value of labour links directly to the exchange-value of the commodity produced, we can then understand that when the commodity produced lacks use or lacks rarity, that as a result the pay of the worker diminishes to reflect this. We also must recognize that the rarity of any commodity is not defined by the actual rarity of its materials, but rather by the rarity of what remains in circulation (or of which is currently being used)
This rapid degradation comes from the interactions between rarity and use. As essentials such as food, water, and shelter are guaranteed, the result is the rarity of these materials decrease, leading to the labour required to produce them losing value sharply. Furthermore even luxury items, which themselves derive their worth from their interactions with essentials (such as a microwave which derives its worth from the value of food), their overall value will drop sharply. This means the value of labour decreases in direct correspondence, regardless of the sector an individual may work in. This system is inherent to capitalism, and is the reason that reform often causes nations to fall into disarray
However, if these essentials are provided by the State, what harm does the degradation of labour cause to the people? It is because these essentials, while provided by the State, are rarely produced, served, or administered by the State (and the thought that in a capitalist society the State can truly do it is a foolish notion). In a study conducted in the mid 1990s, it was found that individual Counties were increasingly more likely (approximately 50% more likely then in years before the study) to contract governmental services to private companies or contractors
A morbid reality of this is that they have a large incentive to maximize profit, through minimizing the worth of their services while maximizing their value. Since these programs are traditionally funded in correspondence to the value, rather than the value as it correlates to worth, this leads to individuals being under-served while the entire welfare system is being financially strained. This strain and under-service leads to the collapse, or ‘breakdown’, of these systems overtime, leading people to be more desperate for work- which the capitalist system has already deemed less valuable due to the welfare system.