• taiyang@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Well yes, but unless you dismantle things it’ll probably backfire. A ton of that wealth is in owning companies, and if that ownership transfered to the state, it would need to be liquidated by selling it to… someone. Which would tank stocks, which would then tank 401ks and IRAs and a lot of other retirement funds, etc… It would get messy and a ton of non-billionares would be impacted.

    Now you can argue that you then use your newfound government cash to pay a new universal social security, and that’s possible but you’d need to design all that ahead of time. Plus if your goal is to not impact people with less than a billion… well, no dice. It’s hard to target just the billionaires, basically.

    Still, if we could at least start the process that’d be lovely. Dismantling the whole system is more effective and way better, but my money would be on gradual socialist improvements paid via higher taxes and not a system overhaul. As it is, we’re going backwards, though, so meh.

    • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 minutes ago

      If you’re in this community, it’s because you believe the system should be dismantled and replaced. I understand this post may be confusing because of that, but it’s more of a thought experiment.

    • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I agree, but don’t let the subtext to this be why even try (not saying your sentiment is cynical, but people will read it this way).

      A lot of good can be done by the right kind of disruption. Won’t solve the system, but would allow for some economic mobility

        • tibi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Right now, most corporations are organized like monarchies or oligarchies where the guys on the top make the rules, and the rest just execute them. This would democratize corporate ownership. We spend at least half of our time awake at work. We should have a voice on how the companies we work for should operate.

          I’m a software developer, and in the big companies I worked for until today, there is a big disconnect between the decisions taken up high and us, the workers. I’ve seen so much talent be wasted because upper management only cares about short term profit. Or inhumane decisions like laying off an entire site a week before Christmas.

    • guy@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      The same companies most possibly destroying our planet? The horror

    • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      16 hours ago

      It’d be complicated to extract this from companies they own without destroying the companies

      In that case, let’s do it and destroy the companies at the same time. Two birds with one stone.

    • kmaismith@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      16 hours ago

      I mean, we’re talking about taking the wealth and distributing it for more constructive purposes, if it doesn’t demolish a handful of fortune 500s in the process we’ve made a mistake. Those fortunes would then be able to be used to take all the workers pointlessly generating wealth for the billionaire class and start working on socially useful ventures

      • MDCCCLV
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        It depends, in theory Amazon should be more efficient but that only works if you close most of the brick and mortar stores and replace it with housing or something useful.

  • shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    39
    ·
    18 hours ago

    That’s not how money works.

    Explained something like this to a friend back in the day. He said the government could easily give us each $1M. And he was right!

    Me: “You know I have a small lawn service, right? Charge $20 per lawn? What would you have to pay me if I had a million in the bank? I probably wouldn’t consider anything less than $10,000 for a job.”

    Mike: “Yeah, but you could still eat at McDonalds for $5.”

    Me: “Who would work there?!”

    Yes, we need to start extracting the wealth back downwards, but we can’t just flood the streets with dollars.

    • Pennomi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      They didn’t suggest giving everyone a million dollars, they suggested using the seized money to pay people to do work on giant social issues.

      It could feed everybody - by paying farmers the normal rate for their food.

      It could halt climate change - by paying people the normal rate to install renewable energy.

      The number of jobs would increase, and society’s problems would be solved, all without causing hyperinflation via huge handouts.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        Do we actually understand the full impact of such a move? I’d like to hear an economists’ take on this.

        edit: downvotes for curiosity. Kinda sad.

    • SleepyPie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Why would we flood the streets? Invest the money in public projects, services, etc. People work them as jobs, now we have more middle class - other businesses make money selling them services - the economy grows.

      For an example of this working in America look up Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “New Deal”.

    • don@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      17 hours ago

      we can’t just flood the streets with dollars.

      Where in the post was this suggested or even referenced? I see nothing indicating “just give everyone lots of money, yay!”, but I do see how the money referenced could be put to use.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Everything you think you know about economics is wrong, and you probably learned it because an oligarch tricked you.

    • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Your comment is bizarrely off-topic.

      But anyway, since we’re already off topic, let’s abolish currency and give everyone what they need instead of creating a system that encourages the hoarding of wealth and resources.

      “ThIs Is NoT hOw MoNeY wOrKs” <-- take that arrogance to reddit