• PhAzE
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Yep, let people make all the money they want, but once you hit 10 billion, you get luigi’d.

    • Jarix@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      Stop thinking in terms of dollar amounts, think in disparities or ratios over minumum wage/poverty line for an economic region/group

      Figure out what our actual acceptable limit is and keep it there despite number of units as that will just need to be continually adjusted

      Edit: crap not who i meant to reply to. Still applies though so ill leave the comment

      • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Right, I would say the limit should be “no billionaires” so that if your net worth including investments exceeds $999M then you have to sell off some property or give money to the taxman until you are under $1b net worth. $999 million is still more money than anyone would ever need but just having no billionaires would be a great start.

        • DrDeadCrash@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 hours ago

          I’d say make a progressive scale such that 1 billion is the theoretical limit, meaning you would need infinite gross/pre-tax wealth to exceed 1 billion in net wealth after taxes.

        • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          15 hours ago

          That’s still probably too high, but its a number nobody can object-to. Would be easy to pass that law in a democracy.

      • PhAzE
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        Even 1 billion works. You have to make it high still, or everyone will say “bu-bu-but that’s communism”