And that goes for all of these fucking leeches: The beloved pop star. The legendary athlete. The really nice lady who gave away ten billion. The soft-spoken revered investment guru who cosplays as middle class.
Every damn one of them.
Comment on There are only like 3,000 billionaires and they're not physically imposing people.
Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 15 hours agoThat about sums it up. They’ll spend a million to prevent giving a thousand to the poor.
FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
Mac@mander.xyz 12 hours ago
100% over a billion
million
fine, I’ll settle for 10 millionFauxLiving@lemmy.world 10 hours ago
No, a flat amount will never work. Make it a multiple of some figure, like average wage. That way it actually changes with inflation and we don’t have a situation where the the inflation adjusted minimum wage is 6 times the actual federal minimum wage.
Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 hours ago
Make it so that if poor people earn more, the rich pay less taxes… Or something, that might actually not function.
FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
Agreed.
Dozzi92@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
I’m fine letting people have 100m. It’s really a drop in the bucket compared to the folks who have 1,000 times more than them. Definitely down to tax everything past that.
foggy@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
I mean to be fair I’d spend a dollar to stop people from asking me for dogecoin investments.
But I also like, work, and pay taxes and shit.
atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 13 hours ago
Paying money to prevent spam is different than paying money to avoid helping people and doing your share in society.
Klox@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
Sure, but it’s also proven to be more cost effective to just manipulate people and shift their costs. Some moron was arguing against California’s billionaire wealth tax bill because billionaires might have “liquidity problems” lmfao.