Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Throughout human history, we see a repeating pattern, that when wealth and power become too concentrated, society eventually becomes unstable and often the result is that the masses are left with no way to regain a decent life except by overthrowing the ruling class.
In order to prevent this from happening, some safeguards could be put into place, such as a "Prohibition on Trillionaires". It has not happened yet, but more than one person has had a net worth in the 12-figure range for some time now. Before anyone manages to become a trillionaire, a legal structure could be created in order to stabilize society by limiting wealth.
For instance, it could be made unlawful to be a trillionaire, with the limit being automatically adjusted for inflation going forward. The fine would be $250 billion per offense, with each calendar quarter resulting in a new violation until such time as the individual is in compliance. The fine would be raised to $500 billion if the individual is found to be attempting to conceal substantial assets overseas and failing to report them. Repeated asset concealments would result in mandatory prison time or a revocation of citizenship followed by deportation to the host country. (All dollar amounts in this paragraph should be auto-adjusted for inflation going forward.)
The USA could take the initiative to try this, for example, hoping that the movement would catch on internationally, in order to make it impossible to evade. Would you support a Constitutional amendment that prohibits trillionaires, in order to stabilize society against the types of events that belong in the history books?
Remember who has control now. Seems many leaders both despots and elected hide money and income SUCCESSFULLY. Remember those papers from banks in Panama showing both UK prime minister and Putin had mega bucks hidden?
So good luck banning trillionaires. Even our Supreme Court ruled corporations can anonymously donate for politics as a right of free speech. In other words companies want pet despots and favored treatment laws, but dont want public to know they are responsible cause it might cut into sales. They want their cake and to eat it too, and have their bought and paid for politicians and judges in power to accomplish just this. Are we next going to let corporations have a vote for every dollar in sales.....
However, I do support higher tax rates for the wealthy. If you earn more you should have to give back to your country more. So many problems to be solved in this country, and often the issue preventing it is $.
Yes. Heck yes. Particularly while there is a homelessness crisis, and most average people can't afford to buy even the smallest home. A billion dollars for one individual, is more than plenty. Let alone $200,000,000,000.00 or whatever they're up to now.
Eliminate poverty, restore the middle class, smooth the wealth curve distribution so that it's still a natural curve, but more of the total share of wealth is in more hands, then, we can talk about increasing that limit. Right now, it's just immoral, IMO.
It shouldn't be a codified limit, per se, but more of an effective limit, via increasingly very high taxes.
I'm sure Jeff Bezos works very hard and deserves to be a billionaire. Being rich is a great incentive and reward for being successful and providing good service to customers and etc. But every few seconds or whatever, he's making more money than most of his factory workers are making in a year. Does he work THAT much harder than them? Is he THAT much more deserving? He's buying the world's hugest mega-yachts, and people are freezing on the streets of Seattle. I just saw one this morning who obviously slept on the sidewalk last night. Obviously there's a lot of problems to solve with that crisis, but it requires $$$.
A million bucks isn't worth a dime anymore, these days. A billionaire (a thousand millions) is super duper insanely wealthy. A $200 billionaire is just flat out pure greed. I'm all for capitalism and I have no problem with the existence of rich and poor and everything in between, but surely this kind of egregious disparity, and totally out of whack wealth and income distribution curve, is not ideal for the human species. Extreme inequality is not healthy for the free market.
The way I see it, you put an "upper limit" on how much a person can be worth, whether it be by simply making a law that sets a "maximum wealth limit", or through more aggressive tax rates, you remove the incentive to work harder.
Yes. Heck yes. Particularly while there is a homelessness crisis, and most average people can't afford to buy even the smallest home. A billion dollars for one individual, is more than plenty. Let alone $200,000,000,000.00 or whatever they're up to now.
Eliminate poverty, restore the middle class, smooth the wealth curve distribution so that it's still a natural curve, but more of the total share of wealth is in more hands, then, we can talk about increasing that limit. Right now, it's just immoral, IMO.
It shouldn't be a codified limit, per se, but more of an effective limit, via increasingly very high taxes.
I'm sure Jeff Bezos works very hard and deserves to be a billionaire. Being rich is a great incentive and reward for being successful and providing good service to customers and etc. But every few seconds or whatever, he's making more money than most of his factory workers are making in a year. Does he work THAT much harder than them? Is he THAT much more deserving? He's buying the world's hugest mega-yachts, and people are freezing on the streets of Seattle. I just saw one this morning who obviously slept on the sidewalk last night. Obviously there's a lot of problems to solve with that crisis, but it requires $$$.
A million bucks isn't worth a dime anymore, these days. A billionaire (a thousand millions) is super duper insanely wealthy. A $200 billionaire is just flat out pure greed. I'm all for capitalism and I have no problem with the existence of rich and poor and everything in between, but surely this kind of egregious disparity, and totally out of whack wealth and income distribution curve, is not ideal for the human species. Extreme inequality is not healthy for the free market.
You are ignoring the fact that Jeff Bezos' wealth is largely made up of Amazon stock that can go up or down. Do you think the government should get to take some portion of his stock holdings, simply because on paper they are worth more? Bezos gets his cash by selling Amazon shares. When he does that, he pays taxes on the profit, and since he has a basis of pretty much zero, he pays taxes on the full amount.
There are also practical issues to consider. If you impose the tax based on the value at December 31st, and the tax s due ion April, what happens if the stock tanks, and is now worth 10 percent of what it was? The taxpayer likely won't have the cash to pay the taxes.
There's also the issue of the taxpayer losing control of the company they started. If enough taxes are levied over time, their ownership share will decrease, with unknown results for company performance.
Who cares how much money anyone makes, as long as they pay their fair share in taxes, and make their money legally?
For some reason the 'quote' function isn't working right....
Anyway, taxation is a huge can of worms and many believe a straight percentage covers "fair share" since the rich DO pay more in actual dollars - at least without all the special deductions they manage to find.
I really believe in a progressive tax structure - deductions or not. Beyond a percentage, the richer you are the more disposable income you have and the more able you are to easily cover basic expenses.
Maybe higher luxury taxes would better get at all this non-income "income" the rich have since they don't really work. That and higher rates on investment income, etc.
I think those are far more workable than making being a trillionaire illegal - that hardly would be a drop in the bucket and when it comes down to it, I don't want to PUNISH them but to have that money go to better use. Yup, I said it - redistribute that money!
Remember - it's not ALL their money by any means, and they won't be hurting.
The way I see it, you put an "upper limit" on how much a person can be worth, whether it be by simply making a law that sets a "maximum wealth limit", or through more aggressive tax rates, you remove the incentive to work harder.
But tell me, does Bezos, et al. work a billion or even a million times harder? Are they a million times smarter? He can be a billionaire, sure - but the tax rate must be in line with that level of profit he's making.
Back when there was a 90% tax bracket businesses were still running and new ones starting. Ambitious people need surprisingly little external incentives.
Location: Formerly Pleasanton Ca, now in Marietta Ga
10,345 posts, read 8,557,056 times
Reputation: 16679
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
I don't think there should be a "wealth limit". However, I do support higher tax rates for the wealthy. If you earn more you should have to give back to your country more. So many problems to be solved in this country, and often the issue preventing it is $.
I don’t know if that would solve everything. Giving people money for example may lead people to just not better themselves and live off the government.
Don’t the wealthy already pay most of the tax now?
Posters in the California love to boast how prosperous the state is yet it has so many problems. Money isn’t solving it there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by leadfoot4
The way I see it, you put an "upper limit" on how much a person can be worth, whether it be by simply making a law that sets a "maximum wealth limit", or through more aggressive tax rates, you remove the incentive to work harder.
Yes and if that wealthy person is creating new jobs by expanding and also becoming wealthier at the same time, doesn’t the country miss out on growing?
Last edited by Mike from back east; 11-26-2022 at 12:15 PM..
Reason: Merged 2:1
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
