I'm not against people having money, but to have a thousand times more than most people can make in their entire lifetime is just taking it too far. There should be a cap after which you pay 90% tax or something
Check the progressive taxation we had in the US after WW2 when, barring the racism/sexism/otherisms, the US actually thrived and single income families could manage being middle class, and owning a nice home. Reagan fucked us, but if it hadn't been him it would have been another terrible regressive.
All these conservative lapdogs continue to fuck us all with their single issue voting and sticking it to the libs.
I'm pretty judgy right now so imo anybody voting for GOP candidates in the US is either gullible, brainwashed, semi/fully mentally deficient, or is so racist or scared of other people's peepees that they will vote against their own best interests.
Problem is billionaires don't make "income" and it's quite difficult to even know what they own, let alone how to tax something like unrealized gains on stock holdings that they are using as leverage to get loans
Not a strong stance to be anti-thief. I'll take it though! We all need to speak plain sense more often.
not surprised considering his other views but glad to see his courage in sticking to his principles against a very biased media landscape. even his rap was fun af. this guy never misses.
Once you go beyond $100,000,000, there is no measurable difference in lifestyle. However, power accumulates. That amount of power shouldn't be in the hands of so few.
The wealth of the rich is still growing and it will continue to grow automatically until the middle class ceases to exist. If we do not take the assets back, it will become impossible for normal working people to ever buy a house, or have any economic power over their own lives at all - nevermind the political control or the media manipulation.
Extreme wealth concentration is THE biggest issue facing society. Mamdani is absolutely right.
The whole billionaire thing is completely arbitrary. It used to be that being a millionaire was a big deal. With inflation, in a couple more years we'll have trillionaires, if Mohammed bin Salman hasn't become the first one already.
If you make more than most people, regardless of how much that is, you should be heavily taxed.
It takes a lot of mental gymnastics to believe that's a controversial opinion. Most people will never meet a billionaire in their lifetime, let alone become one.
It's inspiring to see Americans are still fighting the good fight.
One cannot reign innocently: the insanity of doing so is evident. Every king is a rebel and a usurper.
-Louis Antoine de Saint-Just, 1792
Or, put in modern terms: There is no such thing as an innocent billionaire.
Trump-the dems are socialists!
Some dems-i mean were were not, but thank for the idea.
Trump-.....
What is the other sides' argument for why we SHOULD have billionaires?
Genuinely asking if they have anything tough to contend with or is it just another critical avoidance of theirs?
I usually get some variation of “They worked hard and deserve the reward. We shouldn’t take that away from them, they earned it fairly.” Yes, it’s infuriating.
I'd imagine it's just the argument for capitalism. You know, profit incentive increasing efficiency and productivity and all that. Now this stuff is true to an extent (though a lot of politically active Lemmy likes to pretend otherwise), but all the good stuff happens before a single person reaches a billion dollars so if that's the idea it would pretty much fall flat on its face.
We shouldn't. And he thinks that too. Cool.
Yes! Let’s stop this modern day slavery.
I worry the billionaires will send assassins after him. It would cost them so much less than what he's suggesting.
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.