But how would they be able to live on that?
Submitted 6 months ago by FlyingSquid@lemmy.world to aboringdystopia@lemmy.world
https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/6700163e-ed0c-42c4-b8f0-e6f9e427e3a0.png
Comments
octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Someone accused me of dehumanizing rich people here yesterday. They do a pretty good job of that on their own.
Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 6 months ago
They should not get the privilege of being humanised. They have too many other.
BestBouclettes@jlai.lu 6 months ago
But it’s not real money in their bank accounts! They can barely go by as is!
Sprokes@jlai.lu 6 months ago
Aren’t they using that to get loans? They can easily buy anything they want using that as a collateral. So it is real money.
BestBouclettes@jlai.lu 6 months ago
Pretty much yeah. It’s virtually unlimited money.
ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
Yes, Musk easily found $44 billion to buy out the largest social media platform in existence but there’s absolutely no possible way for him to pay a $6.6 billion dollar tax bill because he doesn’t have that kind of liquidity!
BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Make them take out loans against their portfolios to pay the wealth tax.
ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
Lol … That’s the game every rich person plays and we all accept.
They’re super rich so they can use their imaginary wealth to get even more rich.
When you ask to tax them, the money doesn’t exist or it isn’t what you think it is so you can’t tax them.
BestBouclettes@jlai.lu 6 months ago
We all accept it because these people and their friends own most of the media, so it’s easy for them to make us turn a blind eye to it.
That and they also own enough representatives that there is barely any wiggle room to get out of this mess.
umbrella@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
break up their monopolies then.
apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Go for it and then expand it. Being a billionaire should not be legal.
CableMonster@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
Do you think that it wont get expand to the point where it harms you too? Do you think the government would do good things with the increased revenue (if it actually got increased revenue)?
TheSambassador@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Government is as good or as bad as we make it. Pretending like it can’t be good while actively sabotaging it is conservative’s entire playbook.
And yes, increase my taxes. I’m happy to pay more if we can improve the lives of everyone. If we can pay for things like universal healthcare, good infrastructure, public transit, and decent public housing, double my taxes.
apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I loath the argument that government is slow. It is an intellectually lazy argument, if not dishonest. Why do you think that private business is any different? Having experience with a company that was small and nimble that grew to a behemoth. Having friends and acquaintances in places big and small, private and government: you see this at play. You have to accept moving slower at scale, especially at government scale. It is as good at you make it. And at least there is objective accountability from people not using it for passive income.
Gabu@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Your proposed billionaire tax would still leave them ahead. My proposed tex would leave them a head.
FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 6 months ago
I don’t really understand what is being advocated for, here. Are we taking away their stock shares? Because 214.8 Bn is absolutely not the liquid assets of Elon Musk.
You can’t buy a house or car with unrealized gains. Are we going to start taxing everybody’s unrealized gains annually or what is the effective bracket?
Ya’ll gotta be more specific and shit. Let’s just tax realized gains, and any loan collaterals based on the stocks, at exceptionally high rates? That feels like it would be way easier than some vague bullshit that could harm consumers more than billionaires.
jj4211@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Speaking of that house to buy, I’m getting taxed on my “unrealized gains” in my home value being estimated higher, despite our being where I live and not really primarily intended as an “investment vehicle”.
So if property tax can apply to stuff I’m not using as “money”, then I have a hard time objecting to the same general principle applied to stocks. The same arguments that can be made about stocks can apply to any property tax.
FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 6 months ago
Are you asking for reform of Real Estate and Property Taxes or are you asking to Tax all unrealized gains?
BTW property taxes are like 0.32%-2.32% and when you sell your home then you have to pay big boy capital gains taxes unless you’ve listed it as your primary residence for more than 3 years.
I think an unrealized gains tax could work if we set the bar high enough that poor people won’t be negatively affected by it.
dream_weasel@iusearchlinux.fyi 6 months ago
You’re mostly right here, except stocks are an asset you can take a loan against with a margin loan or a line of credit. I suggest if you are doing that it SHOULD count as realized gains because you absolutely can use such a loan to buy a house, a car, a yacht, an island in the South Pacific, or an aircraft carrier.
FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 6 months ago
Okay but if you take out a loan then you need to repay the loan with income which is taxed, so…
It’s already being taxed…
Bjornir@programming.dev 6 months ago
They can do what they already do and use their unrealized gains as collateral for a loan and use that to pay the tax of they don’t want to realize the gains. This is already how they spend their money without realizing gains. I don’t see the issue with them doing the same for taxes as they do for their yachts and private jets.
FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 6 months ago
You’re late Bjornir, like 5 people in this comment thread have said the same thing.
starman2112@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
If Elon Musk can immediately liquidity $50 billion to buy a social media website, these parasites can liquefy $5 billion to pay for the roads their services rely on
FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 6 months ago
Alright but the meme doesn’t say that. The meme just says they have unrealized gains and that we should take them. That’s poorly thought out, the bracket should be clearly defined before we even think about making an unrealized gains tax, because I guarantee you there are some GOP reps who salivate at the idea of taxing grandmothers of their inadequate retirement funds.
bstix@feddit.dk 6 months ago
You can’t buy a house or car with unrealized gains
Yes you absolutely can.
Go to the bank. Show them your balance sheet. Loan money. Pay for stuff.
Got_Bent@lemmy.world 6 months ago
It’s already a thing and has been for quite some time. It’s called mark to market. Most people and companies use it to enjoy unrealized losses, but unrealized gains are in play. It’s not a new concept. It’s just that it’s an election at the individual level rather than a requirement.
AA5B@lemmy.world 6 months ago
We manage not tax things like houses and cars on unrealized gains. Why should stock or art, or anything be different?
FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 6 months ago
We tax houses with unrealized gains when they sell, also.
Cypher@lemmy.world 6 months ago
So how does this wealth tax work? Are stock holdings taxed? Stock quantity doesn’t magically go up unlike fiat currency which governments just print more of.
None of these numbers make any sense in terms of how capital actually works. Is the government meant to take the profit in stocks? Because these billionaires aren’t selling that much stock each year and aren’t earning that much from CEO paychecks.
Not to say CEO paychecks aren’t obscene…
And what do you do when they pack up and move themselves and their companies to tax havens?
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 months ago
The rich aren’t fleeing Massachusetts despite a wealth tax.
Turns out there are disadvantages to living in tax havens over living in Boston and Cape Cod.
panicnow@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I have a house. I say have because while I have the title to the house, the bank has a lien that basically means they own it. Like a stock, my house increases in value. The government in my state then taxes me on the value of the house. Taxing me on unrealized gains in the house (I have not sold it) is like taxing a rich person on the unrealized gains of stock (that they have not sold).
It is possible to come up with ways to tax stock. It will be imperfect like all tax systems are. It will be better than what we have now.
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 6 months ago
Is the government meant to take the profit in stocks?
Yes.
There is no need for the billionaire to liquidate their stock in order to pay a tax in dollars. The IRS just confiscates an equal percentage of every position they hold, and liquidates it over time, selling no more than 1% of each position’s total traded volume per month, so as to not radically impact the stock price.
When they pack up and move, we say “mission accomplished”. Let them leech off an adversary’s economy.
SupraMario@lemmy.world 6 months ago
This entire thread is people who don’t understand how the system works.
jennwiththesea@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I think you’re confusing a wealth tax with an income tax. They’re different. As for how these wealthy people pay, it’s not up to the government to figure out how someone pays their taxes. The onus is on the taxpayer.
eskimofry@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Sounds funny you trying to tax these billionaires and are failing to find any obvious way… which is what these billionaires do to hide from tax and paying their fair share.
masquenox@lemmy.world 6 months ago
The billionaire parasite class cannot pay their “fair share.”
Even their very lives cannot make up for the disaster they and their ilk has perpetrated against the world.
Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 months ago
The wealth tax seems to small. Everything above 999 million should be taxed 100%
dezmd@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I’m perfectly fine with 99% tax over 999 million.
manefraim@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Everything above 20 million per year should be taxed 80% and everything below should be untaxed.
Phegan@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Tac billionaires until billionaires don’t exist.
Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 6 months ago
UFODivebomb@programming.dev 6 months ago
Did you mean tax or tactical nuke? Either way
snekerpimp@lemmy.world 6 months ago
They have a psychological problem. They are mentally unsound and need to be locked up. They are destroying lives just so they can win the game of capitalism and hold all the fake money, all the fake power. They want to be demigods, worshiped by the “lessers” at how wonderful and great they are because they are winning the game of capitalism.
And they are succeeding.
givesomefucks@lemmy.world 6 months ago
If a family has two dogs and a cat, some might think that’s a little much but as long as the animals are healthy and happy it’s fine…
Billionaires are like animal hoarders that go around stealing every dog they see in someone’s backyard and never getting them spayed/neutered or even acknowledging they exist once they have possession.
Billionaires are hoarders, plain and simple.
It’s just in a hyper capitalist society, that’s encouraged instead of viewed as a mental illness.
The great news is even if we tax them, they can still compete for who has the most money.
jsomae@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
I’m all for taxing the rich. But this image should explain that this would be an annual due, not a one-time thing. Don’t pull your punches.
mkwt@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Why is Bill Gates paying a smaller proportional share than the other two?
ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
This graphic sucks because wealth tax isn’t a term that means they pay this much
For instance a tax where you hand over all wealth is still a wealth tax
elrik@lemmy.world 6 months ago
It’s not enough.
RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 6 months ago
But how much would I have to pay when I become ultra-rich?
JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Why take so little? I would recommend a 80% tax bracket above £1b.
Prethoryn@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I always find it interesting is that the mentality or analogy used is cost of living when infact some billionaires/millionaires have stated they wouldn’t have an issue paying more in taxes. The problem is they just don’t have to and if they don’t have to then they just shrug.
It’s really an issue with the common person as well some people thoroughly believe they shouldn’t have to because they worked long and hard for that money while others, those very rich people, argue that putting them in a higher tax bracket or adjusting the tax they pay on a higher percentage within that bracket is just, “unfair.” Conservatism at it’s finest. I am not really sure what it is with the right wing and people about complaining on paying taxes until it is brought up that, “hey we could make those who make a whole lot more pay a whole lot more cutting what you pay down some.” Then they are up in arms. You either want someone to pay more so you pay less or you just don’t want to pay taxes at all if those involved are “hard working rich people.” But hey, instead let’s complain about how people just don’t want to work anymore or about how young folk just don’t understand the good ole days and how you had to work overtime on jobs with poor safety and life quality issues that forced more work out of you for less. Yeah you are right don’t understand that and how it was legal and why it should be happening now. Why would someone younger feel inclined to pay less and work more. It’s called we aren’t interested in making the same mistakes those same old folk now should have been up in arms about years ago. But then you are met with, "well those were just different times. " Oh, gotcha sooo we should fix it now?
Then there is also a complete misunderstanding of how taxes and the economy works in general. If you genuinely think Biden and one person in office has complete control over the economy I think you also need to consider getting a therapist because you know zero about the way the world functions.
Tax the rich higher. Elon doesn’t give a shit about your hard work and your crop fields or corn dying because the world is getting hotter. So why in the absolute fuck should you give a damn as to whether he pays more money every year to help the rest of the world out. If you are the person who thinks it is silly to do so then please for the love of God leave the rest of us alone that want someone to pay more for you because in the end it should be done.
uis@lemm.ee 6 months ago
It’s barely even 3%! What happened?
johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Seems a little weird to put exact figures on a wealth tax that does not exist yet and would need to go through both houses of congress and reconciliation. Is this the amount owed on an annual basis?
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Friendly reminder that “The Giving Pledge” was an enormous tax dodge perpetuated by Wall Street con artists, and that these guys have effectively created a tax-free pipeline for all sorts of graft, cronyism, and corrupt business practices that the current US legal system condones.
lucid@programming.dev 6 months ago
Everyone that likes to parrot “tax billionaires gigantic sums of money” seem to miss the obvious counterpoint - if they get taxed too much, they’ll just leave and go to a country with a less gigantic tax burden. Which would be devastating for the US economy if they bring their companies with them. Can’t tax the rich if the rich aren’t here.
To be sure, the wealthy should be taxed more, but it has to be within a range where it won’t motivate them to get up and leave.
PhAzE@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
They lobby and make the rules, so it’ll never happen sadly.
als@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 months ago
any money over $1 billion should be taxed. You can’t earn that in a life without exploiting people and you can’t spend that in your life unless you’re an idiot
thewut@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Why should we pay taxes at all if we can print money?
EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de 6 months ago
I’m surprised Bezos is down to that much. Good on that lady for divorcing him. If anyone deserves to be fucked in a divorce, it’s him.
Also, Gates should owe more than that. The things he’s giving “charitable donations” to are mostly very evil groups that want us all to eat bugs and live in coffins.
PiratePanPan@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 months ago
mfw i can’t buy a fifth gold plated private jet because i got taxed a billion dollars
venusaur@lemmy.world 6 months ago
People always argue that the rich would take their business elsewhere with a wealth tax and I don’t believe it.
eatCasserole@lemmy.world 6 months ago
The only way to fix billionaires is revolution.
John_McMurray@lemmy.world 6 months ago
You’re not wrong (in that they’d survive), it’s that it does nothing. I’d be surprised if every penny Musk has can run the American government for a day.
Etterra@lemmy.world 6 months ago
F that. Shave then down to a few million, tops. There needs to be a wealth cap.
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 months ago
A wealth cap and a maximum wage in my opinion. The idea of a minimum wage without a maximum wage is odd to me to begin with.
Nelots@lemm.ee 6 months ago
What the ultrarich just heard: “So you’re okay with us getting rid of minimum wage, then!”
Clent@lemmy.world 6 months ago
They’ll just claim aren’t paid in wages, see it’s a performance bonus. Totally not a wage. That’s for the poors.
menemen@lemmy.world 6 months ago
While I have nothing against a “maximum wage”, the wealth tax is much more important.
KittyCat@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Not a maximum wage, a maximum controled assets. On the board of 100 billion dollar company, no one can own more than 1% of the voting shares.
Find yourself with more assets than you can split among owners? Better start reinvesting it into the company and your employees.
BrinkBreaker@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 months ago
Not a max wage. A max multiple of minimum wage.
You can only ever make more than 5x/10x/etc… the minimum wage. They want more money? Then everyone needs to make more money.
They can feel free to increase their riches, but tie it exclusively to the rest of the population.
aidan@lemmy.world 6 months ago
What does a maximum wage and wealth cap even mean? What happens when you start a company and it gets too successful?
T156@lemmy.world 6 months ago
The loophole is that they aren’t paid that amount in maximum wage anyway. The actual wage is some degree of modest. They just get paid in bonuses and stock options, which don’t count for one reason or another.
stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 months ago
i mean technically your maximum wage is what you earn - number of employees * minimum wage
DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 6 months ago
How? Most people this rich have next to nothing in their bank accounts. The ridiculous numbers you see are not ban account balances or sports cars and yachts. Its primarily shares of the companies they manage. E.g. if you tax them conventionally, you force them to close the factories and everyone becomes poorer. If you just confiscate the company, now the government owns companies, and we saw how that goes plenty of times: USSR, North Korea, Cuba, …
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 months ago
…or you have the workers communally run the factory and elect the person to run it and if they don’t do a good job, they lose the position. Which seems like a pretty good incentive to succeed. In fact, “do this right or you’re fired” rarely seems to apply to the person at the top.
paulcdb@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Would it? Give the shares to the workers and they have a huge incentive to run a company well. Right now a CEO’s only priority is to maximise shareholders return. A workers led company would maximise both shareholder return AND have an incentive and pride in doing a job properly instead of the low morale and poorly built crap we have today.
History has shown anytime control is in the hands of the few, it’s run into the ground in order to maximise the wealth for the few so giving control to the masses of workers in companies would lead to more compromises and might sound bad at first but would likely work better the more people required to make drastic changes.
And as said many times, no billionaire has ever ‘earned’ that. They’ve all gained it through exploitation and wage theft either directly or indirectly!
somethingp@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I agree a wealth tax is difficult to implement, but that alone is not a reason to dismiss the idea. Also, for shares, you can always sell shares to pay the taxes that are due. The point of wealth tax is to wealth, not income. Much like a property tax.
Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Why should we have a stock market in the first place? Seems like all it does is act as a means for the rich to shuffle their wealth around, funnel it to the top and claim they have next to no liquidity.
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
Production should be run by the workers via a democratically run and accountable worker-government.
The government owning companies is not a bad thing. The US Postal Service and Fire Department are state-run and operated, and are highly popular. Why do you think a profit-motive is necessary when it’s the source of enshittification?
Emmie@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Wealth is there to motivate people to do something more than dwell and ruminate. If there was a wealth cap or maximum amount of money you can have no one would have motivation to do all these things we have like companies and such.
Wrench@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Call it at 20m. That’s a great fucking motivation to me. That’s a couple nice houses,a boat or two, several over the top cars, and pretty much any possession you can think of within reason. You could lead a very comfortable life on 20m net worth.
Humanity does not need private keys, mega yachts, mega mansions, etc.
There would be no personal motivation to siphon every penny away from your employees as you can if you’re at your wealth cap. Employees who should be sharing in the company’s success in meaningful terms.
There would be no motivation for enshitification to reduce costs to the bare minimum for every last penny.
Etc.
The extreme greed that “motivates innovation” is such a crock. Yeah, obscene wealth dues fuel venture capitalism atm, but those investors are also who twist the knife on CEOs to make short term decisions that end up destroying companies at the detriment of employees and customers alike.
CEOs aren’t in it for the long haul. Investors aren’t in it for the long haul. It’s all rape and pillage under the current system.
trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 6 months ago
It’s not. Nothing remotely like that is going on here.
Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 6 months ago
If there’s a minimum wage, there should be a maximum wage
xpinchx@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Billionaires: ok no more minimum wage then. /s kinda
Iampossiblyatwork@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Billionaires don’t have wages.
umbrella@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
agreed but good luck enforcing it without a literal revolution
refurbishedrefurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org 6 months ago
Hell, I’d be okay with 100 million total in both liquid and non-liquid assets as a wealth cap. We could even tie it to inflation, so long as we also tie the minimum wage to inflation (let’s say, starting at $30/hr federally, then increasing as needed locally).
Mango@lemmy.world 6 months ago
$100m can even be fine. Let them have their Bugatti and mansion. There’s big toys aplenty to have them motivated without being complacent and not milking the rest of the world for all it’s worth.
Syrc@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Even capping it at 1 billion would do wonders. That means, for example, Elon would have to pay more than 200 billions to the government. Imagine what we could do with 200 billions.
And yes, they could split it with family and friends, but I find it hard to believe he (or anyone actually) knows 200 people he can trust with 1 billion each.
occhineri@feddit.de 6 months ago
F that. Shave them down to a loincloth and a bouncing ball