this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2024
477 points (97.0% liked)
Technology
59427 readers
4429 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Five dudes control more wealth than half the country shit's wack yo!
Way I see it, the brackets should be marked first at the quintile thresholds for household income, then at the 5th percentile threshold, then at the 1st percentile threshold.
Then each bracket's rate is the total of the percentages of wealth controlled by every bracket below the given bracket plus half the difference between that and the sum of percentages including the wealth that bracket owns.
So as an example, the 1%, they control 26.5% of the country's wealth, so the base is 73.5%, plus half of 26.5 is 86.75% for income above the 1% threshold.
That's how it should be.
But really that's what gets the other side to whine for when they'll leave the trailer park and become billionaires.
Even if we changed it to a fractiotof that it would still bring immense change. As long as it doesn't go to the military budget I guess
Personally I think the surplus revenue should actually be set aside at first.
Turn it into a national sovereign wealth fund to use as a way to patch over lean times in the budget or to dip into during a recession or depression.
With so many people interested on embezzling or at least "using" it, which constitutional mechanism is going to ensure that doesn't happen?
I'd just put it in the control of the Fed with a requirement of providing reports of performing their duty as a fiduciary controlling it.
Plus being able to quickly make use of it in an emergency would allow the Fed to be alot more dynamic on monetary policy where needed.
It's still an organization made up of people.
I don't have a better answer, I still think yours is not satisfactory.
Yeah but those people report directly to Congress, and personally I've got my own bone to pick with how Congress is set up so my pie in the sky version of things has a much better designed one
Also abolishing the independent executive because it inherently acts as a parasitic force dragging a country further and further from a democratic/republican core of design
If your taxes for the rich are too high, they will all take their ball and go home - to one of their many homes in a country that doesn't have high taxes. Or just declare their superyaught anchored in international waters as their "home". With "business travel" as their reason to spend time (maybe all of the time) on US soil.
When you have that much money, there's not really much society can do to touch you.
I absolutely hate this mindset. I hear it now and then, and it's being used even by left wing politicians to hand over more money, power and control to the wealthy, because "they have so much power with their money already, there's nothing we can do". Oh ok. So just capitulate then? Because we're not starving to death? Nah fam. Work harder. Collaborate. Be creative. As creative as they are with their bookkeeping and finances. And if that shit doesn't work, it's violence time.
The US has one of the highest exit taxes in the world, if it's any concern you can raise it even higher, but capital flight is something the rich try to say will totally happen but that they never actually ever end up doing because paying high taxes isn't worth the hassle that uprooting and moving everything to a new country entails.
That's the kind of effort that gets provoked by imprisoning them for just complaining against those taxes, or by seizing everything they own without even nominal compensation.
I view the "take my ball and leave" talk as gaslighting. The rich are rich thanks to infrastructure we fund on a public basis. Roads, police, fire departments, and the very function of society is something we all collectively fund that they benefit from. I wish them all the luck in the world going to some third party totalitarian shithole with minefields, far more broken roads than we have, and warlords.
Have fun, fuckheads, please leave and don't let the door hit you in the ass. That's my response to any talk about uprooting.
Have you honestly calculated both to decide which is more expensive, or it's just talk?
Because there have been a few instances of big companies doing just that.
Except not really because what that is is them saying they're owned or headquartered internationally.
It's not reflective of capital flight at the scale of hyper wealthy individuals, just of how fucked corporate tax law is in comparison to income tax law.
Similar exit tax laws for reheadquartering out of country or selling out to a foreign owner would probably help cut way down on the practice.
I think you are wrong but I'd like to see this tried, if not too catastrophic.
Well the highest marginal rate ever was about 90% in the 50s and there wasn't significant capital flight at that time
There wasn't significant movable capital either at that time.
in the 50s‽ Yeah sure whatever ya say.
Yes, you might have noticed that Microsoft, Google, Apple etc are the kind of companies which didn't exist back then.
Yeah, instead there was a bunch of fruit companies, IBM, and GM.
The most bloated corporate valuation in history was the South Sea Company, and that fiasco went down in the 1700s.
We've confronted robber barons before, and then stuff like the Sherman Anti Trust act happened. If we can collectively gain the resolve, society can absolutely touch these motherfuckers. We arguably had even worse politicians back in the late 1800's and early 1900's, and after some serious incidents it became a politically charged enough issue to overhaul Congress and the Senate.