The concentration of the vast majority of wealth in the hands of a small number of people is obviously an unbalanced and unjust system that can't continue to work.
Abolish Billionaires
41–50 of 76 posts
Re: Abolish Billionaires
#42Real question: If I start a business and people love my product so much so that I become a billionaire. Am I a bad person?
Under current Democratic party norms: yes.
I find it hard to believe this curt post portrays your real intellectual opinion, as opposed to your emotional feelings. It just seems like shit stirring.
Re: Abolish Billionaires
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally, I don't go so far as to advocate abolishing billionaires, but I do favor a very high tax bracket like 80 or 90 percent to fund basic redistribution. This would not abolish billionaires, but would make it harder to become a dollar billionaire. When asked why he robbed banks, Willie Sutton answered: "Because that's where the money is."
Well, at least you understand that you’re robbing someone.
This is frankly an absurd reduction, and harmful to rational discourse. While arguing for and against it can be a helpful thought exercise, it's depressing how often I see it simply stated in indignation.
Re: Abolish Billionaires
#44Real question: If I start a business and people love my product so much so that I become a billionaire. Am I a bad person?
It seems to me like the answer is obviously "no", and that nobody outside the extremes in all these wealth disparity conversations even suggests such a thing, so I wonder if you had a more subtle question in mind along similar lines.
Re: Abolish Billionaires
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Under current Democratic party norms: yes.
Do you really believe this? The democrats are on the whole not against billionaires, there is simply an increase in popularity to make billionaire pay more tax. Something closer to historical levels no less. Then people make comments like this and try and things into a storm in a teacup....I wonder if this is how they truly see the policy or its just cheap internet comments.
I only know what I read.
"Coates followed up: "I hate to personalize this, but do you think it is moral for individuals to, for instance—do we live in a moral world that allows for billionaires? Is that a moral outcome?"
The answer from the congresswoman [AOC] was emphatic and came without any hesitation. "No, it's not. It's not. It's not. And I think it's important to say that."
https://reason.com/archives/2019/01/28/are-billionaires-immo...
"Technology executives and venture capitalist have also expressed increasing concern in the past few weeks about Democrats’ denigration of business leaders, said Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), whose district includes Silicon Valley."
“It should come as no surprise that a few billionaires want to continue to hoard as much wealth as possible, increasing their corrupting influence over our political system,” said Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/wave-of-tax-...
edit: added [AOC} to make it clear which congress member was speaking to Coates.
Re: Abolish Billionaires
#46In 2019 the US federal budget is $4.407 trillion. [1] The combined wealth of America's top 400 billionaires in 2017 was 2.7 trillion. If the social democrats got their dream and took all of their money we could fund the government for only about seven months. When will D.C. and the American people realize that tax rates aren't the problem?! It's the spending stupid! Edit: Yep, keep downvoting facts people. That will…
There’s taxation as a means of funding the government. And then there’s taxation as a means to make certain people poorer.
I don’t think people suggesting the billionaire tax care that much about the first point.
Re: Abolish Billionaires
#47In 2019 the US federal budget is $4.407 trillion. [1] The combined wealth of America's top 400 billionaires in 2017 was 2.7 trillion. If the social democrats got their dream and took all of their money we could fund the government for only about seven months. When will D.C. and the American people realize that tax rates aren't the problem?! It's the spending stupid! Edit: Yep, keep downvoting facts people. That will…
I think spending is an important part of the equation, but calling a broad audience stupid and then asserting that their negative reaction is because they can't accept facts is textbook unconstructive behavior.
Re: Abolish Billionaires
#48In a just society the only way you can get rich is through voluntary interaction by adding value to world. In our society you can get rich through legislation, which has created the wealthy parasitic class that earns a living by preventing competition. To target all the rich is to loot and destroy your society. To target the wealthy parasitic class would be a revolution frankly.
I don't know if calling it a 'revolution' is the best idea - it seems like they always end up devouring their children. Marxist 'eat the rich' types of revolutions are pretty recent, too - traditionally it seems like a frustrated upper middle class is what aristocrats and overreaching executives really have to fear. Also, I never miss a chance to trot out this quote: "Don't put your trust in revolutions. They always…
As far as I understand it there has been a few legislative pincher moves since inception. The 17th amendment might qualify as one. It allowed for a populist instead of representative vote of our senators and basically created the modern situation of whomever spends the most campaign money wins. AKA special interest/lobby groups now rule.
That is one of of the few small changes of course the country made that if reversed would probably be to the benefit of most. To revoke the 17th would be senators literally voting themselves out of work, hence it would never happen. A soviet style collapse is a revolution too, just forced and likely crummy.
Re: Abolish Billionaires
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Under current Democratic party norms: yes.
I find it hard to believe this curt post portrays your real intellectual opinion, as opposed to your emotional feelings. It just seems like shit stirring.
It is pretty clear that new wave Democrats (e.g., Justice Democrats, or the like) are more than willing to consider any billionaire immoral because they are billionaires.
At least that is what their most prominent pols say.
Re: Abolish Billionaires
#50Putting aside moral issues, taxes don't redistribute wealth. They just give it to the government. How is the government going to be suddenly better at managing money? What leadership controls this new spending? What makes them so much better? This is the day 2 stuff that never gets any thought, and yet is the critical piece of this theory.
Case in point: 2018 Federal taxes centralized $3.4T in the hands of 300 people.