3 ms·

> I can't believe what we're letting them get away with. If you consider that billionaires only personally consume a sliver of their net worth, what are they a

> I can't believe what we're letting them get away with. If you consider that billionaires only personally consume a sliver of their net worth, what are they actually getting away with? For example, say a billionaire consumes $100K worth of food, $20K worth of gasoline and jet fuel, and $1m of clothing, entertainment, baubles, prostitution and medical services per year. What happens to the rest of her wealth? It's tied up in investments: $500m in shares of company X $100m in shares of company Y $100m in a mutual funds $100m in real estate (houses and land for personal use) $100m in a philanthropic fund $ 98m in artwork What do you find so objectionable about this?

LimaBearz 5y ago
Not OP but I think that most people don’t have any issue with this what so ever. What people do have a problem with though is them skirting tax laws with hacks, loopholes, regulatory capture, and controlling the conservation propping themselves up as economic Jesus’es. Of of late a decent majority is starting to notice that there wage has been stagnated but that billionaires assets seem to grow irregardless of market trends or what the economy is doing. Most people I think are fine with their existence and good for them for doing good at the business game but theyre only one facet of of the economy, and while they’re doing great everyone else arguably isn’t getting better
- wombatmobile 5y ago
  OK, thanks. I have two questions. 1. If I were to lend you the deluxe magic wand, what changes would you decree that would cause everyone else to get better? Now let's quantify the effect of those changes. 2. If instead of the billionaires getting richer next year, rather, because of your changes, the delta of their projected wealth increase goes to everybody else, how much better off would that make the average person?
  - nerdponx 5y ago
    The average person isn't necessarily the problem. Start with the people who benefit the most from the least help. Steady access to decent food, clean water, safe non-toxic housing, and preventative healthcare. Is that so much to ask for?
    - wombatmobile 5y ago
      > Is that so much to ask for? You tell me. You've got the deluxe magic wand and you can do whatever you like. What would you do in order to change society for the better to achieve the outcome you've described?
3pt14159 5y ago
Ninja Edit: I didn't downvote you by the way. The first objection is that the system allows them to marshal massive amounts of resources to achieve their objectives without support the very infrastructure that they rely on to acquire ever increasing control of resources. The second objection is that they've lobbied for a system that benefits them. Do we really think of adding years to copyright is something that actually benefits everyday people? No. Of course not. But the wealthy pressure the politicians and the politicians cave and most of the public is too busy to understand or fight it. The third objection is that they drive up costs for others for areas of the economy that are naturally limited. The larger their house and plot, the fewer people can live there, the more they drive up prices for land. They buy multiple homes. The best lakes and groups of normal people can't compete. In basically any market where there is an arms race the ever increasing economic disparity is making the day-to-day reality of the poor worse. Automation has helped bring the cost of things down, but in so many areas it's a hollower copy of what it used to be. People used to bake bread at home all across Canada. Now, it's wonderbread for the poor. To an economists spreadsheet things look great, but there's a humanness that is getting pushed out of interactions. Imagine this continuing on and on, as technology continues to ever centralize returns. We're going to start having trillionaires soon. Right now the word is marked as incorrect by my spellchecker, but once it hits the news there's going to be the new bar people hit. A new top class. There should be wealth limit. Or very high wealth taxes after, say, $100m. It doesn't make sense for such a small percent of people to own such a large percent of our society.
- wombatmobile 5y ago
  > Ninja Edit: I didn't downvote you by the way. No worries. It's interesting that some people have, because I haven't expressed an opinion in favour or against billionaires. I've just asked for opinions and thoughts. Disclosure: I am not a billionaire.

LimaBearz 5y ago

Not OP but I think that most people don’t have any issue with this what so ever. What people do have a problem with though is them skirting tax laws with hacks, loopholes, regulatory capture, and controlling the conservation propping themselves up as economic Jesus’es. Of of late a decent majority is starting to notice that there wage has been stagnated but that billionaires assets seem to grow irregardless of market trends or what the economy is doing. Most people I think are fine with their existence and good for them for doing good at the business game but theyre only one facet of of the economy, and while they’re doing great everyone else arguably isn’t getting better

wombatmobile 5y ago
OK, thanks. I have two questions. 1. If I were to lend you the deluxe magic wand, what changes would you decree that would cause everyone else to get better? Now let's quantify the effect of those changes. 2. If instead of the billionaires getting richer next year, rather, because of your changes, the delta of their projected wealth increase goes to everybody else, how much better off would that make the average person?
- nerdponx 5y ago
  The average person isn't necessarily the problem. Start with the people who benefit the most from the least help. Steady access to decent food, clean water, safe non-toxic housing, and preventative healthcare. Is that so much to ask for?
  - wombatmobile 5y ago
    > Is that so much to ask for? You tell me. You've got the deluxe magic wand and you can do whatever you like. What would you do in order to change society for the better to achieve the outcome you've described?

3pt14159 5y ago

Ninja Edit: I didn't downvote you by the way. The first objection is that the system allows them to marshal massive amounts of resources to achieve their objectives without support the very infrastructure that they rely on to acquire ever increasing control of resources. The second objection is that they've lobbied for a system that benefits them. Do we really think of adding years to copyright is something that actually benefits everyday people? No. Of course not. But the wealthy pressure the politicians and the politicians cave and most of the public is too busy to understand or fight it. The third objection is that they drive up costs for others for areas of the economy that are naturally limited. The larger their house and plot, the fewer people can live there, the more they drive up prices for land. They buy multiple homes. The best lakes and groups of normal people can't compete. In basically any market where there is an arms race the ever increasing economic disparity is making the day-to-day reality of the poor worse. Automation has helped bring the cost of things down, but in so many areas it's a hollower copy of what it used to be. People used to bake bread at home all across Canada. Now, it's wonderbread for the poor. To an economists spreadsheet things look great, but there's a humanness that is getting pushed out of interactions. Imagine this continuing on and on, as technology continues to ever centralize returns. We're going to start having trillionaires soon. Right now the word is marked as incorrect by my spellchecker, but once it hits the news there's going to be the new bar people hit. A new top class. There should be wealth limit. Or very high wealth taxes after, say, $100m. It doesn't make sense for such a small percent of people to own such a large percent of our society.

wombatmobile 5y ago
> Ninja Edit: I didn't downvote you by the way. No worries. It's interesting that some people have, because I haven't expressed an opinion in favour or against billionaires. I've just asked for opinions and thoughts. Disclosure: I am not a billionaire.