> Slippery slope is a logical fallacy [0], which you likely already knew. Falsely asserting a slippery slope—that A must lead to B which must lead to C when no

> Slippery slope is a logical fallacy [0], which you likely already knew. Falsely asserting a slippery slope—that A must lead to B which must lead to C when none of these things are inevitable—is a logical fallacy. It is not a fallacy to point out that the grass is wet and the hill is steep and suggest that perhaps we should put up a sign advising people to stay away from the edge. The argument is simply that this is a dangerous situation which we would do best to avoid, not that anyone who goes near the edge will inevitably lose their footing. > The billionaires have so much more money than everyone else … Do they really? It seems to me that what they mainly have is not money but rather illiquid assets, i.e. capital. That includes stocks, which can be sold—at the expense of giving up control of the company—but also stock options which can't be exercised immediately and tons of actual capital equipment, inventory, buildings, and so forth which can't readily be put to other use. > Income taxes on the rich used to be near 90% in the top bracket, so it's not a one way ratchet. Keep in mind that they never actually collected anywhere near that much. Those 90% brackets were purely theoretical.