One example I had already given was progressive taxation -- which would hit not only capitalists, but also the people I call new class that others would I guess refer to as very prosperous workers.
In reply to this someone else on this list suggested that he (it was a guy) thought that the new class might support this taxation if they thought it would be spent efficiently. Now I have two responses. One is that I think this is only true for a minority at most. Upper income people -- even non-capitalist upper income people -- have always been anti-income tax. In general people who make a lot of income do not like having it taken away from them -- regardless of how "efficiently" it is spent.
That said, I agree with what I think this poster had in mind -- that it is a shame that efficiency in government -- getting good and responsive service for what ever we spend has been left to conservatives and moderates. I actually think that new class analysis may suggest an approach to making efficiency in government a left wing issue --- which makes sense since the term "efficiency" when used by the right is merely an excuse for destroying government.
Very simply, I would say that state tends to be unresponsive to ordinary people because it is serving the interests of elites (standard left analysis so far).
It tends to be inefficient because a lot of the functions government serves (including those useful to capitalists, coordinators, and working people alike) are most efficiently done when these functions are provided equally to everybody -- but will have to effect of equalizing incomes if provided equally and thus not only are provided in a less than optimal manner , but require a great deal of red tape and rigitity to keep from being provided in an optimal manner. (Education, garbage collection, fire protection street lighting, are all examples of public goods which actually lose value when distributed unequally. Health is an even better example -- all the worse for being provided privately in the U.S.)
So obviously left reforms in goverment would consist of more democracy and equality -- including the following: 1) an equalization of pay scales so that one government worker does not earn a great deal more than anther per hour. This would raise rather than lower the earnings of most government workers. 2) worker self management -- so that within the constraints of budgets and tasks to be performed goverment workers would democratically how to carry out their task. 3) Democratic oversight by ordinary people. Paul Cockshott had a suggestion which struck me as brilliant in this regard. To the extent that direct democracy cannot be subsituted for elected officials he suggested that these offices be filled by random selection of ordinary people by lottery -- so that say a city council would consist of 30 or 40 ordinary people selected by lot to set the goals and budgets for city workers, and to oversee their work.
Thanks
Gar Gar W. Lipow 815 Dundee RD NW Olympia, WA 98502 http://www.freetrain.org/