Ascend910@lemmy.ml to Memes@lemmy.mlEnglish · edit-22 months agoTaxation will not work, we need to just take and devide their moneylemmy.mlimagemessage-square52fedilinkarrow-up1981arrow-down117file-text
arrow-up1964arrow-down1imageTaxation will not work, we need to just take and devide their moneylemmy.mlAscend910@lemmy.ml to Memes@lemmy.mlEnglish · edit-22 months agomessage-square52fedilinkfile-text
minus-squareasdfasdfasdf@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up22·edit-22 months 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-up17·2 months agoWould be nice, would still require a revolution.
minus-squarePiemanding@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up10·2 months agoYou can have a soft cap with higher taxes as wealth goes up.
minus-squareSlopppyEngineer@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up14·2 months 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-squareINHALE_VEGETABLES@aussie.zonelinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down5·2 months agoWith votes, sadly.
minus-squareeatCasserole@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·2 months agoIf voting could dethrone the wealthy, they wouldn’t let us do it.
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
With votes, sadly.
If voting could dethrone the wealthy, they wouldn’t let us do it.