These programs combined would completely transform our world. By redistributing this wealth, millions of lives would be saved. Billions would be rescued from poverty and disease. By inconveniencing just 400 people, the entire human race could advance to a new, unprecedented level of development.
And all of them would still be billionaires afterwards.
Is it really so radical to suggest that this is the right thing to do? Given the choice between millions of deaths, and slightly shrinking the fortunes of a few super rich people, how could anyone conclude that the death of millions is preferable?
We cannot accept this level
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who did not.
Well that was sobering
It's also infuriating that huge companies like Amazon pay little to none taxes. It's unfair competition towards small businesses that do
It's how they're able to sell stuff so cheaply. The sanctimonious way it claims that no individual deserves this much money made me lose interest though.
wautd wrote: ↑2021-05-21 07:03am
Well that was sobering
It's also infuriating that huge companies like Amazon pay little to none taxes. It's unfair competition towards small businesses that do
Worse than that. There are companies, including Amazon, who managed to get away with a negative effective tax rate for 2018.
Right. Says the fucking idiot billionaire defender. Like that isn't the truest form of sanctimonius horseshit if ever there was, oh those poor billionaires worked hard for their fortunues, how dare you suggest etc etc.
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who did not.
His Divine Shadow wrote: ↑2021-05-21 02:12pm
Right. Says the fucking idiot billionaire defender. Like that isn't the truest form of sanctimonius horseshit if ever there was, oh those poor billionaires worked hard for their fortunues, how dare you suggest etc etc.
Right. Tell me, how much baling twine did you use to make that massive strawman?
You would find, if you did try to seize their wealth, that it's mostly tied up in stocks, and the act of seizing it would cause the value of said stocks to crash. You'd get a lot, but much of the "fortune" would evaporate in the seizure.
So I saw, but that's just dealing in the market cap. It doesn't address the real psychological effect of seeing hundreds of billions of dollars worth of stock seemingly arbitrarily seized; no one wants to be holding the bag when that happens so it could and probably would trigger a massive selloff.
Again, that doesn't mean the project wouldn't be worth doing. As the link notes, the calculations could be off 500% and there would still be more than enough. I'm not saying it would evaporate the entire market.
Yeah there are such fantastical and unimagniable sums out there that if you even siphon of a miniscule amount you'd be able to do so much with it. And gotta say so far looks like Biden is doing a lot more of that kind of stuff than I would have given him credit for. I really hope that global corporate tax initative of his goes somewhere. There was this idea in the 90s to add transaction fees to capital transfers too, maybe it's time has come.
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who did not.
It might offset some of the cost- does it come in rolls long enough or do you buy it by the mile?
...
So I saw, but that's just dealing in the market cap. It doesn't address the real psychological effect of seeing hundreds of billions of dollars worth of stock seemingly arbitrarily seized; no one wants to be holding the bag when that happens so it could and probably would trigger a massive selloff.
It also ignores the small matter of exactly how such a thing is supposed to be carried out, which that page is suspiciously devoid of mentioning. It's not as though we live in a dictatorship where stocks and shares can be seized "just because" via some idealised half-baked Robin-Hood style notion. And that's just the easy part.
REMEMBER THE RULES -- No Ad Hominems!!
You know better.
Nitram, slightly high on cough syrup: Do you know you're beautiful?
Me: Nope, that's why I have you around to tell me.
Nitram: You -are- beautiful. Anyone tries to tell you otherwise kill them.
"A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP" -- Leonard Nimoy, last Tweet
EnterpriseSovereign wrote: ↑2021-05-21 11:49am
It's how they're able to sell stuff so cheaply. The sanctimonious way it claims that no individual deserves this much money made me lose interest though.
What is your problem with its take though?
At the end of the day, the type of wealth they have garnered can only come through massive exploitation of labor and resources.
With the changes in finance/banking in the past couple decades, it feels like we're keeping the US government in the 20th Century. We are so focused on the idea that the US government needs cold hard cash so we gotta liquidate the stock, that we aren't considering alternate instruments such as perhaps the stock itself.
I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season."
