Comment on Billionaires hate democracy
okamiueru@lemmy.world 2 days agoWealth tax should be progressive. It is dangerous to let so much accumulate.
Even something ridiculously “extreme”, such as 99% wealth tax over a trillion, every year. 90% over a billion, every year. 5% over 10 million, every year. 0. 1% over a million. Would make perfect sense to me. There would be zero change to their quality of life. They just wouldn’t be able to buy influence at scale that can subvert democracy. And that tax would be more than sufficient to lift everyone out of poverty, or effect so many positive changes in the world.
5318008@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
A progressive wealth tax has benefits as well. I just think there’s value in pointing out the impact that such a small percentage has. Implementing even a fraction of a percentage would make a serious impact; we don’t need to go whole hog right here, right now.
My ideal starting point for a progressive wealth tax would max out at 2%, because that’s within a standard deviation of annual S&P growth.
I understand the perspective that the extreme wealth taxes wouldn’t change the quality of life of the ultra-rich… but do you know what the long term impact on the economy would be?
I don’t. And I study this kind of thing. This is not the kind of system that responds well to massive, overnight changes. Most Americans get their food by buying it… of we fuck up, and the economy irretrievably crumbles without a backup, people will starve
As desperate as people may be for radical change, it is worth it to make these proposals in a responsible way, and ensure that we’re not doing more harm than good.