Ascend910@lemmy.ml to Memes@lemmy.mlEnglish · edit-21 month agoTaxation will not work, we need to just take and devide their moneylemmy.mlimagemessage-square46fedilinkarrow-up1916file-textcross-posted to: rpg@lemmy.eco.br
arrow-up1916imageTaxation will not work, we need to just take and devide their moneylemmy.mlAscend910@lemmy.ml to Memes@lemmy.mlEnglish · edit-21 month agomessage-square46fedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: rpg@lemmy.eco.br
minus-squareSlopppyEngineer@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up46·1 month agoFirst you need to stop money from systematically flowing to the top or that dividing is only going to be a temporary measure.
minus-squareasdfasdfasdf@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up21·edit-21 month agoI’d argue there should be a flat out cap on wealth. Nobody should have 500 billion dollars. Not sure what it should be, but somewhere under 500 billion.
minus-squareCowbee [he/they]@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up15·1 month agoWould be nice, would still require a revolution.
minus-squarePiemanding@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up10·1 month agoYou can have a soft cap with higher taxes as wealth goes up.
minus-squareSlopppyEngineer@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up13·1 month agoTo name a few: the classic riot, violence and/or revolution the coup organizing through unions and have general strikes until things change sustained peaceful protest voting switching to a different (underground) economic system massive emigration All come with some serious downsides of course.
minus-squareCowbee [he/they]@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up5·1 month agoWould require either revolution or threat of it to pass to a meaninful degree.
minus-squareSlopppyEngineer@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 month agoTurns out that technically they don’t have wealth, just a lot of loans with paper assets as collateral.
minus-squareeatCasserole@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·1 month agoIf voting could dethrone the wealthy, they wouldn’t let us do it.
First you need to stop money from systematically flowing to the top or that dividing is only going to be a temporary measure.
How tho?
I’d argue there should be a flat out cap on wealth. Nobody should have 500 billion dollars. Not sure what it should be, but somewhere under 500 billion.
Would be nice, would still require a revolution.
Acceptable
You can have a soft cap with higher taxes as wealth goes up.
To name a few:
All come with some serious downsides of course.
or to sum it up: socialism
Tax wealth.
Would require either revolution or threat of it to pass to a meaninful degree.
Turns out that technically they don’t have wealth, just a lot of loans with paper assets as collateral.
With votes, sadly.
If voting could dethrone the wealthy, they wouldn’t let us do it.