I think all the talk about billionaires is using a completely arbitrary number and subject to inflation. Wealth inequality is the big problem, it doesn’t matter what number on their bank account is.
Comment on There are Minimum Wages, Why Not a Maximum Wage?
mechoman444@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I’ve often said we don’t need billionaires. That when one reaches that milestone anything above $999,999,999 should be taken as taxes from that person.
When I say this people often become defensive saying that the government shouldn’t be able to dictate how much wealth one person can accumulate. (It also happens that many of these people are prolife but that’s neither here nor there.) Often times comparing this action to communism which of course it isn’t.
The issue of course is that many people don’t understand what a billion of anything is. The human brain can’t comprehend such massive numbers. But nevertheless, there are people that are approaching the trillion dollar mark a number even further removed from a billion by several magnitudes.
Should there be billionaires. Probably not… What do you think?
catloaf@lemm.ee 2 days ago
LANIK2000@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Considering there’s no fully legal and definitely no moral way to get that kind of money, they should all be behinds bars. As for kids that inherit such wealth, shame on them for accepting blood money and doing literally nothing with it, besides make the world around them even worse.
merc@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
people often become defensive saying that the government shouldn’t be able to dictate how much wealth one person can accumulate
Of course it should. If we’re expecting to live in a democracy, then people need to have equal voices. If you’re a billionaire you have a megaphone, as Elon Musk has shown. Democracy can’t work if some people have far more power than others.
SynopsisTantilize@lemm.ee 2 days ago
Show them the money visualizer website alteredqualia.com/xg/examples/money.html#s[orders…
TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee 2 days ago
The problem is that they have enough independence to just cross borders and easily pay for new citizenship if it suits them. It would have to be a world wide movement. It’s impossible, or at least would only be possible within some mythical completely self-sufficient country that could withstand their meddling.
chiliedogg@lemmy.world 2 days ago
My solution:
Your tax burden is your tax burden. If it’s 15% and you run off to a country where it’s 5% to avoid taxes, that’s fine. You can pay them 5%.
But you’re still on the hook for the remaining 10%.
If the 5% country tries to act as a tax haven and refuses to enforce the remaining 10%, they get a national embargo until they get in line.
TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee 1 day ago
I have to repeat my response here, that is meaningless, when their taxable income is meaningless. How much did Trump pay in taxes again? The trick is to keep it tied up in an “investment” until they need it.
howrar@lemmy.ca 2 days ago
Isn’t that already how it works? Currently, US citizens still have to pay taxes when living outside the country unless they’re paying taxes to a specific set of other countries. Although consequences are on the individual who fails to pay and not their country of residence.
chiliedogg@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I’m not saying for US citizens and US companies. That’s how they avoid taxes - by registering in anther country.
Any person or company that does business in the US, even tangentially.
You’re based out of Panama? Cool. Pay them what they require, then pay the remaining X that a US company would own to either Panama, the US, or some other country you operate within.
Don’t grant them tax havens.
Demdaru@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Welcome to yet another world war I guess?
chiliedogg@lemmy.world 2 days ago
We’re due.
merc@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
The US has exit taxes, as do many countries. If you try to renounce your US citizenship, you can be taxed based on the value of unsold assets.
I hate that the US is one of the few countries in the world that has citizenship-based taxation. It’s awful and stupid. But, in theory, it does mean that an American couldn’t just avoid taxes by moving to another country.
TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee 1 day ago
Those are meaningless, when their taxable income is meaningless.
merc@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
But, if they tried to move to another country and renounce their US citizenship they’d have to pay an exit tax based on the entire value of their assets, including unrealized gains.
IvanOverdrive@lemm.ee 2 days ago
There really isn’t much difference in lifestyles between billionaires and people with 100 mil. No one needs that much money. Anyone who has made more than 100 million has done something truly heinous to do so. I feel we should set our sights at a much lower tax bracket to cut down any potential antisocial oligarchs.
mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 2 days ago
if you exceed $999,999,999 it should reset, giving people a motivation to keep things well under the cap. like exceeding the high score registers in a game, let it roll over.
timestatic@feddit.org 1 day ago
What would be the point in amassing more wealth when its capped? At that wealth no matter what you do, its not gonna get less really if you invested into things. How does that solve any of the problems we have in society?
mechoman444@lemmy.world 1 day ago
There wouldn’t be a point aside from maybe philanthropy. That these powerful Rich individuals will continue in Mass more wealth above the $1 billion cap specifically so others can benefit from it. I wouldn’t hold my breath for anything like that.
audaxdreik@pawb.social 2 days ago
I was thinking about this the other day, one of my favorite analogies is seconds.
A million seconds is 12 days. A billion seconds is 31 years. A trillion seconds is … 31,688 years.
The analogy already breaks down, because while most people could understand 12 days and a lot of adults can understand 31 years for having lived it (some even twice or more!), 31,688 years is completely incomprehensible again. How many human generations is that? All of recorded human history is only like 5,000 years. It’s utterly, mind-numbingly insane. No trillionaires, ever! No billionaires!!!
www.cnn.com/2024/09/17/business/…/index.html
This was published on September 17th of this year, after most of the nonsense of Twitter and utter things. He’s still on track, by 2027 no less. There’s no telling how directly and flagrantly he’ll benefit from a Trump win, either.
spongebue@lemmy.world 2 days ago
My favorite is “do you know the difference between a millionaire and a billionaire? About a billion dollars”
Like, being a millionaire is a pretty sweet spot to be in if you’re lucky enough. Not quite like a millionaire of decades ago but still good. But if you’re a billionaire, a million dollars is basically a rounding error.
merc@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
I think the best way I’ve seen to illustrate it is the stories of immortals earning incredible amounts of money every day who still can’t reach the wealth of Elon Musk.
Like, you’re an immortal born during the ice age 80,000 years ago. You are somehow making $5000 per day (or its equivalent in gold for the 79,700 years before dollars are invented, and you save all of it. You’re not as rich as Elon Musk.
Womble@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Use milliseconds instead: a million milliseconds is 17 minutes, a billion milliseconds is 12 days, a trillion is 31 years.