298
OK so it's time to say the quiet part out loud: the reason that governments have so far held off on taxing billionaires at 1% or 2% is the fear that they might spend 2% or 3% against those governments in revenge.
Billionaires, as a class, are likely already spending that much or more on lobbying for lower taxes. Or really lobbying for the status quo, since existing loopholes allow them to achieve an ultra low or even 0% effective tax with alarming regularity. The threat they make is wealth flight. "If you raise our taxes we'll take all our wealth somewhere else!" As a result taxes on the ultrarich have essentially been a global race to the bottom for decades. At least now there finally seems to be some indications that wealth inequality cannot be ignored the way it has been for so long. My hope is that we'll eventually see some international framework that effectively raise the tax floor for the 1%. It won't cover every nation, but if it encompasses the EU, US, Commonwealth and other aligned countries then that would go a long way.
And what Billionaire wants to live in a shit-hole country? If governments are committed, they can find a way. Oh, you want to travel to the EU? What a shame that the visa process requires some transparency...
That's exactly it. If affluent countries can get on the same page, they can neutralize the "wealth flight" argument and we can start shifting the balance back toward something that remotely resembles equality.
It's always been a fallacy that the rich can remove their money from all developed economies and still remain rich. Also, if billionaires are taxed until they're no longer billionaires, that money hasn't disappeared, it's been recycled.
And there's a fundamental series of questions under all this: who elected billionaires? Who benefits from their continuing to be billionaires? What are the costs? How can we fire them?
The ancient Athenians would vote to expropriate and exile the rich if they weren't working in the interests of the polis (cutting deals with enemy states, interfering in politics, corruption). Perhaps Western countries should all pass laws that a limited number of referenda can be held annually to make a similar disposition of the modern ultra-rich?
If you want to insure yourself against capital flight go for a Land Value Tax. Let 'em shove a hectare of land in their luggage.
Georgism was rejected as unworkable in Victorian times. What has changed to make it workable now?
Well, just tax them at 99%
Lots of problems solved..
Curse them to a life of normal levels of phenomenal wealth! Justice! /s
You really could. They have a personal wealth that rivals some nations GDP. Paying almost every penny they make in profit to maintain that level of privilege is fine by me.
I for one would be all for a wealth cap for all beings considered people
This would ALSO include companies if they want to continue with the being people thing
I love these kinds of debates because it's more or less an acknowledgement that none of these countries (including highly developed first world countries) are democratic and are instead either controlled or heavily influenced by the wealthy class and not by the common people.
Consider an escalation scenario. Who's going to come to heel first?
The current lack of taxes on the super rich is more radical I’d say
There are 2360 dollar billionaires in the world and 211,275 people with a net worth of over 30 million dollars. The 100 super-rich families are way to few.
Other then that we could do something like CBAM. Every country without a wealth tax has to pay extra tarrifs, for all goods and products sold to countries that are members. Get the US, EU or China on board with that and we will say a lot more taxes. Tax heavens can be bullied.
Tax heavens can be bullied.
They can also be taken over and all the assets seized. Ending the global money laundry would to a long way towards normalising politics.
That IS a radical plan. Totally rad, even!
i doubt this is happening so soon, Lula's party was impeached before for way less of an attack at the local burgeoise.
it was Dilma back then but things havent changed much, if anything we are in a less favorable position now. Lula is leading a burgeoise coalition government right now.
also: taxing the rich is nothing radical, despite what the guardian says. think ending capitalism if you want to call something radical.
Every developed country should be doing this. Leave them nowhere to hide.
this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2024
298 points (99.3% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5298 readers
728 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS