Did I say mandatory? I meant optional! You’re “free” to die in a cardboard box under a freeway as a market capitalist scarecrow warning to the other ants so they keep showing up to make us more!

  • Allonzee@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    We should tax extreme wealth into oblivion, with a 100% congratulations you won capitalism tax at some point so they can’t collect enough wealth to start warping politics beyond their single vote.

    No one should be able to live like modern pharoahs in a finite world with finite resources where others die of lack of resources.

    • Professorozone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Or, how about we just tax everyone equally and keep them from making the rules. Make a little money, pay a little money. Make a lot of money, pay a lot of money. As far as I’m concerned, if you can make a billion dollars on a level playing field, more power to you. Now pay up.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Or, how about we just tax everyone equally and keep them from making the rules.

        I don’t know, Professor, why don’t you learn some history to figure that one out for yourself? Why do progressive tax brackets exist? Do you think they just appeared one day?

        • Professorozone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          And still no reasonable argument on how/why to tax unrealized gains. Just more rich people suck and so do you for daring to suggest that not EVERY law allowing it is horrible.

          I’m out of touch with reality for suggesting that we actually just tax people equally but OP isn’t out of touch for suggesting we suddenly put a tax on an imaginary number because many rich people might be able to abuse it. Classic.

          • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Oh hey I just saw you a second ago… That’s weird. Almost as if you went into my comment history to try to bother me elsewhere.

            That’s some weird shit, dude.

            Who’s the “anti-social” one?

      • Allonzee@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Because capital is an expression of power beyond material needs/wants, and even government can’t effectively govern a class of people that have enough capital to bribe officials en masse to literally bend the laws and regulations to their wills, including to make their bribery perfectly legal as they succeeded in doing here.

        That’s why fiscal conservatives were so aroused by the idea of making government, the government that is supposed to protect the citizenry from the whims of those with more power, “small enough to drown in the bathtub.” They succeeded. Our government is subservient to Wall Street’s dictates because we let a few citizens accumulate enough, and shrunk government oversight enough, to turn it into just another acquisition to manipulate to maximize short term private profit.

        • Professorozone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          That’s a really nice view point. I agree with what you said completely. The problem is, it doesn’t stress the issue we’re discussing.

          I say, you should tax an unknown value. You say, billionaires are bad.