• Dagwood222@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    I got into it with someone I worked with [who made exactly as much as me.] Asked what would someone buy with $5 billion that they couldn’t get with $1 billion. He couldn’t come up with something, but was still going to defend someone else’s right to have it.

  • NutWrench@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    “We have this fantasy that our interests and the interests of the super rich are the same. Like somehow the rich will eventually get SO full that they’ll explode. And the candy will rain down on the rest of us. Like they’re some kind of pinata of benevolence. But here’s the thing about a pinata: it doesn’t open on its own. You have to beat it with a Stick.”

  • Shake747@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    If they did tax the wealthy heavily, they’d probably leave the country, and pull their money and resources with them.

    I’m sure another nation would be more than willing to house billionaires/ultra millionaires and their assets, and your country would lose a lot of money/cash flow/jobs

    It’s a hard challenge to solve in a world wide setting.

    • snooggums@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      While that is a load of horseshit, it doesn’t matter.

      Either they leave and cost the country less to prop up their businesses through tax exemptions so someone else can fill the void, or they don’t leave and pay their taxes. Society wins either way.

    • BeautifulMind ♾️@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      If they did tax the wealthy heavily, they’d probably leave the country, and pull their money and resources with them.

      We did tax the wealthy heavily- in the period between FDR and Reagan. From the 40s to the 80s the top marginal income tax rate was between 70 and 94%. And do you know what the ultra-rich did? They prospered along with everybody else, they stayed put in the USA, and they seethed about other people prospering and their loss of power and influence.

      You know what else they did? They spent money to corrupt politics, to pack the judiciary, to legalize bribery and money in politics, to build international legal frameworks to prevent countries from regulating or taxing their billionaires. They stood up propaganda organs to subvert democracy, they paid politicians to betray the voters and strip away their labor protections, and here we are today deep into the garters of another gilded age.

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      They didn’t leave when the top tax rate was something like 90% back in FDRs day so why would they leave if it’s 40, 50, even 60%? I seriously doubt we’d EVER go that high as the ones that would be affected control our government, but still.

      • joshLaserbeam@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        But didn’t they leave? I think most 70s British rock bands have a chapter where they leave to France or Switzerland directly because of the taxes.

  • MxM111@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    That is contradictory. If there are no billionaires you cannot tax them. Obviously the 35K guy reacts to that.

      • MxM111@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Obviously not for 35K guy. :)

        Edit: asker chatGPT about it:

        The most well-known lists that rank the wealth of individuals are Forbes’ various lists, including the Forbes 400 for the United States and the Forbes World’s Billionaires list for international rankings. As of 2023, to be included on the Forbes 400 list, which ranks the wealthiest individuals in the United States, a person needed to have a net worth of at least $2.9 billion

        My point is that we often forget how rich the rich are. Human brain just is not good operating with billions.

        • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          During the Occupy Wall Street days a group of guys started yelling at my wife and I, calling us 1%'ers because we were having dinner at a “nice” restaurant (~$200 for ap, entree, dessert, drinks, and tip). I realized how clueless most people are about what truly rich means.

          I’m wealthy, not gonna lie, but I’ve also had two serious health scares, one being cancer. All it takes is one prolonged bout with cancer to fully wipe the proceeds from our 25 year career in tech. That’s not rich, that’s called wealthy enough to be able to take a breath from under this boot were under.

          Ten years ago, a dear friend, a genius, and highly regarded in his field (not tech) had a house in an affluent neighborhood, a BMW, nice clothes, nice watch, kids taking dance and music lessons, etc. The full blown suburban Bliss lifestyle. One nervous breakdown led to job loss, to divorce, to mental health issues, to drug use (though mostly weed), to now living with his elderly mom in a run down trailer in the bayou. That slide to ruin took less than the ten years but I rounded up. Now look at Elon. A hundred kids, baby mommas everywhere, some suing him, his mental breakdown led to blowing 44BILLION on a dying platform, and none of it even makes a dent.