There are a myriad of news articles here on Lemmy that display the abhorrent influence billionaires have on our society (especially the US, where I reside). I consistently read comments where the posters appear hopeless and despondent of the situation, while others jokingly refer to the guillotine.
As for myself, I have recently found myself with a lot of free time on my hands after being laid off and want to gather ideas on what would be the best hypothetical route to solve this issue. Let me be clear: These are only THEORETICAL IDEAS and I do not condone any illegal activity.
Historical precedent: While I am not intimately familiar with the inner workings of the Occupy Movement, I do know that they were constantly attacked as being unorganized and lacking structure. It would be wise to not fall into the same pitfalls if those were accurate assessments.
Logical formulation: The foundations of the key points of the movement must be logically sound to withstand any external (and internal for that matter) scrutiny.
Motto: If a motto or slogan is chosen, it must be unambiguous so that attacks are directed to the movement, not the motto itself.
I am also aware that most people can’t spare any time to these kind of movements. Similar to the Texas seceding news, many commentators have noted that most Texans are living paycheck to paycheck and wouldn’t be able to dedicate any time to their cause. I would understand that would be same for this cause as well. However, since I have the time right now, I only ask for your ideas.
Broad issues: High cost of living (mortgages, rent, groceries, etc.) Inflation Homelessness
Philosophical underpinnings: Is there a Threshold of Greed? If so, what is too much wealth?
Possible means of reductions: Voluntary donation or renunciation of wealth past a certain point (highly unlikely) Taxation (also unlikely) Seizing assets (illegal and would most likely set a poor precedent)
It might also to organize an open database of billionaires with their respective fields (Forbes is closed) to help organize a boycott of some sort Though I suspect their fingers are in everything and it would be highly impractical.
Sorry for the word diarrhea. What are your thoughts?
Tax the income of corporations not the profit. The same way you get taxed your VAT. That means that corporations can’t tax evade: if they make income in a country, they get taxed. They can’t go an declare the profit in the Netherlands or Ireland and skip paying taxes.
Create and use parallel institutions to allow society to thrive without needing to play the billionares economy game. Example: communication tools outside of a market involvement such as Lemmy, Element (matrix). Economy tools. Association tools. See the application of Dual Power by socialists, which is what you are proposing here, a redistribution of power and wealth.
Vote for those pushing for these.
This is brilliant in its simplicity.
Step 1: Slay the dragon.
Step 2: Redistribute its mountain of gold back into the community.
Easy to say “re-distribute”, harder than hell to do equitably and fairly.
deleted by creator
Bezos didn’t buy the WaPo because he likes to read the news.
While true, what’s your point? Being difficult doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it.
I like that thinking.
Removed by mod
Wouldn’t the wealth necessarily just be distributed to their heirs?
Heirs are finite and have a shelf life. Guillotines are reusable.
That’s it.
Extinguish the bloodline, cut heads until there’s no hoarder, tax evading billionare.
That’s why the French revolution was so… Thorough
Just shows how complicit people are, even when guillotineing a billionaire, we don’t know how to acquire their wealth, anyway other comments explain how to do that.
If you are at the point of guillotining billioners, you can also seize their wealth.
A wealth tax does seem warranted for billionaires. I don’t like the idea of taxing something inert but honestly that’s how they make money. They borrow against thousands of shares at a time and pay zero taxes on the loan.
The wealth tax has never sat well with me either. We are talking about taxing someone based on the value of an asset that they would need to collateralize or liquidate to pay the tax bill. That doesn’t seem right or fair to me.
On the other hand, I read today about Trader Joe’s and their suit against the NLRB and I’ve changed my mind. They engaged in a bunch of shady union-busting behavior, they got caught, and now they’re arguing the NLRB is unconstitutional. Meanwhile, the NLRB has been wielding this power for like 90 years.
Where we’re at is, obscenely wealthy people who break the law are essentially giving the government the finger and saying they should be allowed to do it. They’re acting as if they believe they are powerful enough that they are no longer subject to laws. Trump and Musk are no different. I’m sure there are plenty more.
It used to be people like that were mostly normal. They would make contributions, get their way most of the time, get some pushback when they went too far, maybe kicked and screamed a little bit, but they would eventually get in line.
Now, they simply say the rules are bullshit and they shouldn’t have to follow them anymore. These people are undermining our government and subverting the rule of law. It’s time they get kicked in the teeth.
They derive their power from wealth. Although our government has plenty of problems, it’s still ours if we can hold onto it. It’s time to make a statement to anyone who dares threaten that. FAFO. I’m all for taxing these fuckers.
Don’t have time for a longer post right now. But here’s my question about the wealth tax -
Trickle down BS and Invisible Hand BS all say that if people have wealth, they WILL reinvest it. That’s the correct thing to do.
When you drive a car, the correct thing to do is drive safely and at a logical speed. If you do irrational driving, you get a ticket.
So why isn’t it logical that if you are participating in a capitalist economy, and not doing the correct thing of constantly reinvesting your money, then the govt should fine you for it?
Wealth shouldn’t just sit around and do nothing, specially in foreign bank accounts. If it does, it should be fined… or taxed.
When the billionaires themselves are telling us to tax the crap out of them then why aren’t we?
Also land ownership is literally extracting money from having arbitrarily exclusive access to an “inert” ressource.
Property taxes already exist (maybe those could use tweaking too) so the idea of taxing something simply because you possess it isn’t all that foreign.
“billionaires” wouldn’t be so bad if they just:
-
paid the taxes expected, with no shenanigans
-
were obligated to activate their cash in the economy. No hording, get that cash moving through the economy.
Also if they didn’t exploit their workers and paid them fairly.
But then they wouldn’t be a billionaire!
And nothing was lost.
Sure, if they are explicitly running a business
I’d make personal asset-backed debt above a certain amount per capita taxable. The real reason they pay so little tax is that they never actually realize their assets - they just borrow against them, and all that debt is then slowly deleted through inflation.
So, when they use asset-backed debt instead of income - tax it.
-
Through force.
The system is well and truly rigged, that there is no option for “democratic” means to counter it.
You don’t need to do anything fancy, just make them pay taxes. No loopholes, no moving your money to tax havens, accurate income calculations taxed correctly, gangs of auditors making sure it happens.
A simple wealth tax will do.
“I am worth $150 billion, everybody look at me!”
Great, give us $15 billion and we’ll see you next year.
It’s definitely an option if you want to take more from them, but just paying the taxes they owe like the rest of us have to would make a huge difference.
no loopholes
I don’t think it’s that easy.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Wait, who is deleting posts? Edit: Nevermind, it’s the lemmy.world mods.
Education. Until the masses realize the tricks being used on them, we can redistribute all we want and it will still all funnel up to the top again.
We’ve tried that.
They still decided horse dewormer was a better idea than masks.
There was significant mis-information, which caused that uneducated choice. People didn’t all randomly come up with it by themselves. Blame the con-artist, not the victim of the confidence trickery.
The horse was led to water many times and refused to drink.
No, they didn’t all come up with it on their own, but they individually rejected information to the contrary.
Sounds like victim blaming to me. Have a great day.
When you want to be the victim there’s not much anyone can do.
Yeah and it worked, now the rug has been pulled from schools for a long time.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
I’m not sure, I kinda feel like we could use GUILLOTINES the way GUILLOTINES have been used historically, to spread that happiness around.
Nearly all billionaires have unrealized wealth, meaning they own a large percentage of a giant corporation (ie Bezos, Musk). So taxing them for money they don’t really own won’t work. But there is a better solution.
There are 38 companies in the US whose yearly revenue is greater than 100 BILLION dollars. In fact, the total amount of revenue over 100 billion for these companies combined is a bit shy of the US government yearly budget.
No company needs to revenue that much. Tax the revenue (ie 5%) over 100 billion revenue. This has the added benefit of helping to prevent monopolies and “too big to fail”.
Here is the list and revenue in case you think these companies don’t need to be taxed lol. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_companies_in_the_United_States_by_revenue
Edit: Extra easter egg: The tax rate that you set could be changed each year to meet the amount of the federal deficit (ie the amount the government “overspends”). This would have the added advantage of limiting excessive government spending because politicians would have to explain to the largest corporations why they are spending their money. And you get a guaranteed balanced budget every year!
Suddenly they all make 99.999 billion…
So many thoughts on this. I’ll try to parse some out, one post at a time.
Part of the problem is the standard of legality. Late-stage capitalism is defined by the state serving the ownership class rather than the public. It’s why the state cares very little about wage theft, or addicts dropping dead from opioid overdose, or homeless freezing to death in sub-zero Minnesota but are arresting immigrants who are otherwise well-behaved (and paying their taxes) or raiding repair shops that fix iPhones without an Apple authorization. It’s why media agencies are so worried about piracy even as they try to lay off their development teams if they can be replaced with AI software.
Laws and the legal system work for the ownership class, not the public. Any legal efforts to strip billionaires of their wealth, or even reduce their profits is going to quickly get neutered. This is why the protections afforded by the fourth, fifth and sixth amendments of the Constitution of the United States have been thoroughly gutted with carve-outs. It’s why asset forfeiture is not only a thing, but takes more from Americans than burglaries.
And this is why law enforcement is already attacking mutual aid organizations based on licensing issues, because it’s not actually illegal but facilitates other threats to the ownership class, such as labor actions. There is no rule of law in the US. Your rights go only as far as your lawyer’s means to enforce them, and if you’re depending on a public defender, they just don’t have the time or funding.
The ownership class will (according to Marx) tremble before a communist revolution because we will have ruled out all other alternatives, though we may try a fascist autocracy and a massive genocide machine to dispose of all the underclasses, first.
And that’s the problem. The Holocaust was legal too. Leaving workers hungry and cold to the elements during the Great Depression was totally legal, and at the time communism as per the Soviet Union was looking pretty good to those of our great grandparents who weren’t Carnegie or Rockefeller. This is not our first rodeo. What the state likes (id est, what is legal ) is not a fair moral standard. Nor is what religious ministries like (id est, what is sin ). We have to decide for ourselves what is right and wrong, and if we’re willing to die for our pacifistic standards when law enforcement decides we are intrinsically unlawful
This is why some are arguing the climate crisis warrants resorting to violent sabotage (say, blowing up oil pipelines) since the alternative is to let industry pollute us to global catastrophic risk (of extinction). If you want a sustainable civilization, if you want wealth and power distributed fairly, if you want a public-serving government, then you’re going to have to give up on lawful action. And if you want to stay within the confines of law, you’ll have to give up on equality, a functional state or a future.
Great answer. I’m getting strong Thoreau Civil Disobedience vibes.
Great reply, thank you. OP points out that the situation appears hopeless and I often leave feeling that capitalism has truly captured all the regulators and is now free to grind all value out of society. Assume we get a decent amount of the population on the same page what is the next step? Is there no room for reforms? I have a feeling that only when public discussion consistently prioritizes human well-being above all else can any progress be even attempted.
Eat them
I bet Jeff Bezos tastes like warm dog shit
That’s a testable hypothesis.
Public service isn’t always fun.
