Really though, this is a simplistic question that can’t really be discussed well without major time. It’s not as simple as “allow billionaires to exist” - as even that framing is bad because it implies killing them as that’s the only way for someone to “not exist”.
You don’t have to kill them. You could simply take their money. Then they wouldn’t be billionaires. It’s not like the money belongs to them. It belongs to the government. They’re just holding on to it for a while.
Except this is far from a simple thing to do, since a vast majority of the wealth isn’t money.
For a more realistic option, I think that ending the practice of borrowing against stocks as a method of dodging taxes would go a long way towards getting billionaires to pay their share.
You started a website, and this website became enormously popular. The company you started to run this website is now worth a couple billion dollars. You’re not an asshole, so you pay your employees generously and take an equal wage for yourself. You weren’t in a rush to grow, so you never took venture capital or became publicly traded.
As the sole owner of that company, you are technically worth a couple billion dollars, but your sellable assets are nowhere near that 15%. How is the law supposed to handle this situation without further making enshitification legally mandatory?
I can’t understand why you think of murder when it comes to the question of whether it makes sense for societies to allow people to become so rich that they rise above everyone else. In reasonably functioning states, this can be regulated by law.
I’m not on board with casual murder, for one.
Really though, this is a simplistic question that can’t really be discussed well without major time. It’s not as simple as “allow billionaires to exist” - as even that framing is bad because it implies killing them as that’s the only way for someone to “not exist”.
You don’t have to kill them. You could simply take their money. Then they wouldn’t be billionaires. It’s not like the money belongs to them. It belongs to the government. They’re just holding on to it for a while.
Except this is far from a simple thing to do, since a vast majority of the wealth isn’t money.
For a more realistic option, I think that ending the practice of borrowing against stocks as a method of dodging taxes would go a long way towards getting billionaires to pay their share.
It kind of is simple. They have to sell stuff.
It’s up to them how to do that.
Say we tax them at 15% of US assets after the first $1B. That’ll slowly widdle them down.
So here’s a scenario:
You started a website, and this website became enormously popular. The company you started to run this website is now worth a couple billion dollars. You’re not an asshole, so you pay your employees generously and take an equal wage for yourself. You weren’t in a rush to grow, so you never took venture capital or became publicly traded.
As the sole owner of that company, you are technically worth a couple billion dollars, but your sellable assets are nowhere near that 15%. How is the law supposed to handle this situation without further making enshitification legally mandatory?
Sell the shares to your employees. Or to the government.
So forced enshitification it is.
I’m not forceing you.
You just seem to do that on your own.
I can’t understand why you think of murder when it comes to the question of whether it makes sense for societies to allow people to become so rich that they rise above everyone else. In reasonably functioning states, this can be regulated by law.
You’re probably from the U.S., right?
What if society takes away the billionaire’s money so that he ceases to be a billionaire. Does the billionaire still exist then?
Ah the Ship of Billionaires