• Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    They can live, but it has to be on 60k a year, with all of their initial assets liquidated and used to support people in need.

    • NullVertex@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      60k a year is probably already too generous in most cases, make them live off of the equivalent salary of their lowest paid employee

    • TooMuchDog@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Look I’m all for taxing the wealthy, but saying we should force billionaires, or really anyone for that matter, to give up everything more than $60k/year is fucking laughably insane.

      • Nepenthe@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why, exactly? Only two years ago, 37.9 million people were below the poverty line, which is only $20k/yr. And that’s only counting the US. If we can do it, they can do it.

        If those making over $60k currently cannot make it work when so many of their own countrymen have been doing so for their entire lives, perhaps we need to talk. If nothing else, I can give you financial advice.

      • Narrrz@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think most of us start with the assumption that they’ll never give up their stranglehold willingly, and move on to more practical solutions.

          • Narrrz@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            what other pressure do you have the ability to put on a billionaire that they wouldn’t find utterly laughable, if they even noticed it? but you can’t buy your way out of death. sure, if the threat to their lives were to become credible, they could leverage their wealth to protect against it, but being surrounded by bodyguards at all times, having every rooftop surveyed for snipers before you go out to get coffee - these are things that disrupt their overly-cruisy existences. and the more people there are gunning for them, figuratively or literally, the worse their lives get.

            and sure, if you off them, their wealth will just default to someone else. but if billionaires start dying left and right, their inheritants might just start to find ways to make sure their fortune stays a little shy of that magical 9-digit mark.

        • Seraph@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          They need to make the choice: pay a lot more taxes, or take the second option. I’m not threatening violence, but as our society gets more desperate the targets on their backs get larger.

          There are 756 billionaires in the US and 330 million of us. Once that becomes clear to people things might change, one way or the other. All other “culture wars” are noise generated to distract from this one.

          • unfnknblvbl@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Former tax professional here. The problem is that the billionaires aren’t really billionaires. Elon Musk does not have a quarter trillion dollars in his bank account. His net worth is calculated from what other people think his holdings are worth. He cannot be taxed on this.

            Unless someone is game enough to pass legislation enabling taxation of “unrealised gains” (while not allowing credits/offsets for unrealised losses), billionaires will continue not paying their fair share of tax.