This article is a translation of this article.

From No. 1 to No. 10, various issues in Japan are dealt with. I introduced you to capitalism of desire, the widening asset gap and loosening fiscal discipline, the threat of rapid environmental destruction and climate change, the accelerating mass extinction of organisms, and an impasse that cannot be avoided by individual effort or choice even if these risks are known.

It's too cruel to continue to play the cogs in the wheel of society, feeling helpless and insecure and unable to change anything even after knowing the facts. We must always look forward. The story of the future has to be told with a smile. Capitalism is in need of change.

In this chapter, I would like to propose a system of post-capitalism and what it should look like. It all starts with a hypothesis. I would like you to read it comfortably for now as a reading material.

①Changing Taxes

In No. 10, I referred to 'a seemingly contradictory system that secures profits for investors, but does not widen the gap'. As a matter of fact, it's not that difficult to "think" about. This can be achieved, for example, through a combination of a capital tax and BI (basic income; a type of minimum income guarantee).

The conventional tax system was basically a tax on income in a single year, but a capital tax was introduced to tax capital in proportion to the amount of capital owned. This introduction can directly reduce the asset gap.

In the past, real estate has been collected in the form of real property taxes. However, it was not sufficient to correct the disparity because it was established from a utilitarian point of view that residents living in large mansions receive services such as police, fire, and garbage disposal and should pay a corresponding tax burden. There is no taxation on bank deposits at all, and direct taxation of capital is limited to inheritance and gift taxes and other means.

However, the growing disparity in investment is like the ghosts of the past growing larger and larger, casting a shadow over the present. We live in the present, and the ghosts should be slowly forgotten. The prestige of the past should not prevail forever, and the system must be changed to emphasize the contributions of the present society. It is made possible by a capital tax.

The capital tax has also the effect of gradually resolving past unfavorable distributions. For example, what was recognized as a social contribution at one point in the past may have the opposite meaning over time. When the Lehman Brothers collapsed, financial traders were paid huge sums of money for pretending to create wealth and creating a mountain of bad loans, despite the fact that they caused the financial crisis. The social damage may not be noticed (or occur) until time has passed, such as in pollution such as Minamata disease, the invention of freon gas (later found to be a dangerous ozone-depleting gas), and nuclear power accidents (which were considered cheap electricity before the accident). However, not everything is resolved by a claim for damages. The capital tax also reduces these past mistakes.

With the introduction of the capital tax, capital gradually loses value. For example, if the average return on investment is 1% and the capital tax is 2%, then capital is reduced by a net 1% per year. Investing ceases to be "a means to increase money" and changes its meaning to "a means to suppress the deterioration of the value of capital.

This system keeps capital efficiency as high as it is in traditional capitalism, as asset owners actively seek to find promising (high-yielding) investments in order to curb the decline in wealth. Also, as a society, the negative net return on capital can gradually reduce social inequality.

(2) BI (basic income) benefits

Social change will occur by redistributing the money recovered by capital taxes fairly to the workers and by implementing a minimum income guarantee.

When you hear the word BI, you may immediately think it's a crazy story. However, as introduced in No. 9, now that productivity has increased dramatically, jobs are long gone unless we intentionally increase them. The systemic flaw in the inability to distribute wealth throughout society without forcibly creating jobs have sustained long working hours, wasted resources, and destroyed the environment. What we need to do is not to create and give jobs to the unemployed. It's just a matter of sharing fairly the wealth of society gained through increased productivity.

BI has great potential. Here are some of the benefits.

・Acquisition of freedom
・Restoration of dignity
・Finding your vocation
・Increased productivity
・Political maturity
・Transformation to a sustainable society
・Intergenerational equality

BI frees people from forced labor. Technology has advanced so much in the past 100 years that it would take considerably less time for a person to live at a minimum. You won't have to sell off your precious time at a discount.

BI restores human dignity. Harsh capitalist competition has worsened the working environment by creating fierce competition for jobs among similarly situated workers. Consumers demanded cheaper goods, and in response, managers tried to reduce wages by as little as one yen, and the companies that succeeded in cutting wages were the ones that ultimately survived. In order to make a living and provide for their families, they were forced to work in jobs that didn't feel meaningful, even if they were subjected to power and sexual harassment, and even if they were blamed by unreasonable customers for sales. However, when livelihoods are guaranteed and workers are given the option to leave, workplaces that do not take care of their employees are the ones that are quickly eliminated. The customer is not God; employees and customers will be in a fair position. Insolent customers will not be served as before and will be expected to have a minimum of dignity as a customer. This is a natural thing to do, but It was no longer the norm. In addition, no one wants to work a simple, monotonous job or a 3K job for low wages. Without raising the minimum wage, the mismatch between job contents and wages is naturally resolved by new market principles. Workers will be able to reclaim their job satisfaction and a commensurate return for their burden.

BI gives people a vocation. Under the current system, even the best students may not be able to continue their education if they cannot afford it. Also, students who have never worked before decide on a university major or job with limited information. Difficulty in changing jobs due to simultaneous recruiting of new graduates and lifetime employment, and a lack of funds to live on due to newly-employed workers, make it difficult to find a new job. However, it is impossible to find one's vocation without knowing the society. You can't tell if it's a vocation until you try, and it takes a fair amount of time. In fact, they may not even realize it and persevere, even when the fit with their work is at its worst or the work environment is not good, and they may grow old without using their talents. However, with a minimum standard of living, experiences such as trying out different jobs, volunteering, traveling alone, meeting people, and relearning after working can give you a chance to face life and increase your chances of finding your vocation.

Encountering one's vocation allows one to feel a sense of fulfillment in one's work, and to use one's abilities to the fullest. It's not a group of talented people that performs really well, but a group of passionate people. With a secure basis for life through BI, research and development can be conducted with a long-term perspective, rather than being hindered by short-term profits. BI also facilitates the dismissal of employees and does not require a large severance package for them. In a society where circumstances change dramatically, hiring the people you need for the period you need will rejuvenate the organization and increase productivity. With the conventional scheme, The stronger the employment is guaranteed in the workplace, the less the metabolism of human resources progresses, and conservative human resources may be a drag on the promotion of new businesses. Unfortunately, as Napoleon said, 'Better to have an open enemy, than hidden friends.', which is in a sense true. According to Adam Grand, how to get rid of takers is more important than adding givers to the workplace. Once BI is introduced, there is no need for a minimum wage provision. To gain work experience, to acquire skills, to promote yourself by being hired on a probationary basis, to challenge yourself at a start-up, to work fewer hours, you can decide how you want to work with a more flexible wage structure to fit different situations.

Guarantee of livelihood changes our perception of each other not as competitors, but as fellow citizens of the same society. You begin to think about what you can contribute to society, what you can do to cooperate with each other, instead of a cold-hearted society trying to kick others out and survive in a competitive society. Free time gives us the luxury of thinking about politics, economics, and the future. The more politically active a population is, the higher the level of politics. Think about what you can leave behind for future generations. We can get out of the business of cutting down trees and selling them. 

Of course, one might worry that no one would work once their livelihood is secure. To be honest, there is no complete answer to this question. However, we must face the reality that compensation for service we took for granted was too cheap. If it is reasonable, the work is worthwhile, and you feel that you are making a contribution to society, you will not quit your job even after BI. If you quit working with the introduction of BI, you quit because it wasn't worth it. This is the result of driving workers away through the fear that there will always be a replacement. We live in a society where some people can make a fortune by forcing people to work long hours in this way.

One way to keep the willingness to work, however, is the introduction of a "credit currency". It is a kind of local currency that is accumulated when you work or volunteer and contribute to the community, as distinct from the money provided by BI. It can be used as a sign of individual trust and can be exchanged for services. By using a supplementary currency that cannot be bought and sold, we can distinguish between earned and unearned income and pinpoint the rewards to those who work. (For example, there already seems to be a system that counts the time spent caring for the elderly and allows them to use that time for their own care services in the future.)

What would have happened if BI had been introduced under a pandemic outbreak? It would have reduced the number of people who lost their jobs and were immediately impoverished. They could have waited for the spread of the disease to be contained and thought calmly about what they could do to help. Before the pandemic, tourism businesses and workers were forced to bear heavy losses at their own risk, despite the fact that the government had promoted tourism. Despite fears of a pilot shortage and a push for pilot training in the past, the prospect of shrinking demand for aviation has led to concerns about mass layoffs. Society sometimes changes unreasonably. The BI is an idea of co-existence and co-prosperity that reduces individual risk and supports the whole society.

(2) Change politics and education

However, the introduction of a capital tax or BI would be extremely difficult. A sudden increase in the capital tax rate would be extremely unfair to capitalists, and they would be tempted to flee abroad in one way or another. Excessive BI payments can also take away too much of the incentive to work, disrupting the balance between supply and demand of labor and causing rapid inflation. It requires precise control to keep the various stakeholders in balance.

In order to do so, politics must become more mature. Here are some suggestions.

・Openness of knowledge
・Lower election deposits
・Reduction of election costs
・Election Age Limits for the House of Councillors
・Women's Advancement in Society

The key to improving the quality of politics is the quality of the politicians and the education of the people who monitor the politics. No matter how good a political candidate is, if the people don't understand his or her policies, it's a pie in the sky. This is because if the voters are deceived by sweet words or self-serving thoughts, the candidate who insists on convenient policies for them will have an advantage, and the Diet will be composed of legislators who put localities first and pursue short-term interests. Politicians must always look at the big picture and at the distant future. Parliamentarians are representatives of the country and should not represent local interests, nor should they be allowed to sacrifice future generations in favor of the present one. It is a minimum requirement that voters are financially literate and able to understand and monitor the current budgetary situation. In addition, a high level of understanding and interest in law, economics, environment, information technology, etc. has a great impact on policy making. The quality of politicians and the quality of the people's education are linked.

To improve the quality of politics, education must change. I would like to propose the openness of knowledge to encourage learning.

Nowadays, due to the development of information technology, it is possible to publish and share information at zero marginal cost as long as you have an Internet environment and a terminal. We already have a way to access many educational opportunities without going to school or college.

The lockdown of schools due to the corona revealed a significant difference in the learning environment between Japan and remote developed countries. In countries where remote learning was well-developed, classes continued to be taught online and students continued to receive a quality education. On the other hand, in Japan, the educational gap between families with and without Internet access was a problem.

For example, in the case of examinations, the more teaching materials available, the greater the competitive advantage. Buying the right of textbooks and reference books and opening them for free would be a small price for the country. This way, anyone can read it for free just by preparing a device. There should be equal educational opportunities and should not be influenced by parental income. Knowledge should not be limited, but should be made widely available to improve the quality of education and to better society.

Also, in school classes, teachers often spend their time writing on the board or giving one-way lectures. However, time can be saved by distributing them electronically, rather than having them transcribe the writing on the board. Also, if you are going to give the same lecture every year, you can take a video of the lecture and publish it ahead of time, so that the entire class time can be used meaningfully for questions and answers and interactive discussions. Rather, video allows you to rewind and check what you didn't hear or understand in the live lecture, and then replay it at double speed to save time, if necessary. This will minimize the influence of the quality of teachers you encounter on your life and give you the opportunity to study independently.

In the first place, it is not necessary to enclose knowledge in a university, and the lectures can be open to everyone. There is no point in going to university if all you have to do is watch and learn what is written in the textbook. Such tasks can be done while working or studying in one's spare time. And if the degree of understanding of the lecture content is used to evaluate the university entrance examinations, the amount of time spent at the university can be reduced. It is possible to reduce the cost of education. Truly talented people will be able to work and learn on the front lines without having to go to high school or college. Education is now a thing of the past, and what you have learned is what counts. You don't go to a university just for the sake of going, but to have a strong sense of purpose and to learn what you can only learn there. There may be concerns about the budget for terminal distribution and Internet access. But if there is poverty that cannot afford even a single terminal, the situation should be resolved immediately.

After education reform, the next step is the democratization of politics. Unfortunately, many voters now seem to the problem of "no candidate to choose". Politics has moved away from democracy, despite the fact that candidates are determined by a democratic process.

One reason is that the barriers are too high for ordinary people to enter politics. It comes from too high election deposits and election costs. Without money, he cannot even run for office, it's difficult to get elected, and he will not earn any income if he is not elected. Participation in politics is extremely risky and is a de facto barrier to entry for newcomers. The introduction of BI will ensure a minimum level of living expenses without any income. It also guarantees the livelihood of campaigners and consequently reduces the labor costs associated with elections.

Low election deposits and low election costs are also essential to eliminate barriers to entry. Under the current system, 3 million yen must be deposited in the electoral district and 6 million yen in the proportional representation election. This too high deposit violates the right of suffrage as stipulated in Article 44 of the Constitution: "There shall be no discrimination on the basis of race, creed, sex, social status, family origin, education, property or income." We should follow the lead of other developed countries and bring it down to a minimum level.

By lowering the election deposit, it is assumed that a number of frivolous candidates will run for political office. How to reduce the cost of elections is important, because if we continue to provide generous electoral support, we will be forced to pay a large amount of public funds for the election. The use of mark-up sheets, the discontinuation of election posters and cars, and further use of the Internet and newspapers and television. Spending so much money on election posters is a waste of people and money, and the current law does not allow campaigning on a running campaign car, only name calling. It is just noise and does not help to know the policy.

The next question is how to make it easier for the voters to find the suitable candidate in the midst of a large number of frivolous candidates. Since web information is basically pull-type information (information that cannot be received unless it is accessed voluntarily), push-type media such as television are still important. However, if there are a large number of candidates, the political broadcasts become too long to gather the necessary information. A possible countermeasure would be to hold online elections for the first round and exclude frivolous candidates. The introduction of online elections can reduce the cost of elections. The carefully selected candidates sifted in the first round will be scrutinized in a political broadcast and debates between the candidates will reveal more concrete policy differences.

For more equal elections, the problem of a skewed distribution of voters among the elderly must be solved; it is the younger generation that can take a long-term view 60-70 years ahead and keep up with rapidly changing information technology, representing the interests of the generations yet to be born. Making the voices of young people heard in politics is urgent for the country . Although somewhat of a dream story, I would like to propose an age limit for voting in the House of Councillors elections. Specifically, it would limit voting rights to those between the ages of 18 and 45.

Currently, both the House of Representatives and the House of Councillors are composed of "constituency" + "proportional representation," with the House of Councillors being a carbon copy of the House of Representatives. Despite the fact that the bicameral system was originally introduced to reflect the broad public opinion, there is little difference. If so, can't the House of Councillors be a place to think about the future of Japan, limiting the voting rights to young people only? The population structure of the inverted pyramid will continue for a long period of time as the birthrate declines and the population ages. As it is, the opinions and interests of young people are largely neglected. Restricting voting rights to young people solves this structural problem. When the voices of the younger generation are heard in politics, young people begin to take an interest in politics. It accumulates and transforms politics into a more mature form.

Finally, in politics, it is important that "good people" make the decisions, but it is also important to know "who made the decisions". In particular, Japan is a male-dominated society, with only 10% of Diet members being women in the House of Representatives and 21% in the House of Councillors (Ref). The percentage of female managers in Japan is 12%, the lowest among the G7 companies, and the promotion of women is lagging behind. No matter how good male-centered policies may be, they are far from equal.

The disparity between capitalists and workers, the disparity between generations, the disparity between men and women, they all have the same root. Equal opportunity must be given. It is a basic human right and an idea that should be protected. These reforms will hopefully lead to economic freedom, educational opportunities, and the freedom to participate in politics for all.