3 ms·

You Are Post-Scarcity. Now Be an Activist.

• david927 15y ago
  This is interesting but from the wrong angle. Instead, we need to have a wealth cap. No one in the world needs to have more than 10 million dollars in total wealth. Not just a 100% tax on income over that amount; I mean a 100% tax on appraised wealth over that amount. The additional tax revenue is divided by the country's population size as a small, baseline income to every citizen. Everyone gets a small income. The main reason for doing this isn't to punish the rich; no one can cry at having 10 million, inflation-adjusted. It's to deflate power. In 2007, the top 1% had 43% of the financial wealth; the next 4%, 29%. The bottom 80%, 8%. The very concept of the billionaire is hedonistic and greedy. No one needs or deserves to have so much when others have so little. It's a bug in the system; a flaw in the design. If you have a race and someone is 300 meters ahead of you, you can say, "Wow, great! That person must have trained hard and have a lot of talent." If someone is 40 kilometers ahead, you can say, "Wait, who took a taxi?" Some distance can be assigned to effort, skill and luck. But past that, it's indicative of a flaw in the system or a crime. Let's change that. It's time.
• D_Alex 15y ago
  Not a bad article, however: "Throw on the cost of a small apartment and a used car, and you've arguably got all you could want: health, friends, and intellectual exploration." "Arguably" is the key word here. I, for one, want a helicopter and a beer spa.
• 1Empress 15y ago
  David, you are so right on the point here: "Some distance can be assigned to effort, skill and luck. But past that, it's indicative of a flaw in the system or a crime. Let's change that. It's time." I am reposting this on my website: susansayler.wordpress.com