I like the manifesto, though it might be a bit longy and too detailed in some parts.
I especially like the part where max income is demanded, because I am convinced, this is a major problem: If there is a max income and a max everyone can own, no one (and no bank) would be too big to fail in the last place. This would enable a system where even neoliberal rules would not do too much harm. Example: The market regulates itself. Banks aren’t too big to fail. So, let them fail, let them get bankrupt. Decent banking will pay off in the long run.
So people would also stop chasing after the big money, greed could be fought, as there was a maximum of what you could gain. One would (if the max is well set up) just be not powerful enough in means of property to influence too much, and one would not be able to gain more.
On the other hand one would not have a communist system where all get the same no matter what. People want to achieve things, so let them within certain boundaries. After all you can tax them, so their success is for the benefit of all.This max income could easily be set forth in means of income and property taxes. Instead of having one tax rate for everyone or even have a fix number of steps (what we call nowadays progressive tax), one could have a real progression in tax rates, more for the richer, less for the poorer: One could have a steadyly rising tax rate, accorign to the mass of income or property, where from a certain point (which could be well above a couple of millions, but not too much) every further Cent of property and income would go to the (democratically controlled) state. Then the state should have enough money to pay for good schooling, good housing, good health system etc etc etc
I feel, this would be something like one of the first steps to take, in order to empower the democratic forces within our nations to take all the other steps to a welfare system that deserves the name etc etc etc
There is poorness because there is richness, so if we cut down richness, we’ll cut down poorness at the same time. But if we cut down richness to radically, we demotivate to many people to actually do something, because too many people are at least a bit egoistic. You cannot run the world with Idealists, there are too few of them, so let’s give the egoists some controlled room and make use of their work to benefit the common good. There will still be differences, but they’ll be much more bearable than what we have, and it will be working better than communism, because it does not only rely on idealism.
Of course, another first step is having a democracy, but despite all the problems we face in the western nations with the attempts to abolish demoracy here, we still have a fair part of it left. At least here in Germany we do still have elections and the success of the Pirate Party showns, that there is still a chance for new parties with new ideas to take influence, though of course, things can always be better.