3 ms·
It doesn't feel like you’ve thought through the nuances and implications of this policy, and the tone makes me think you don’t really want to.
by _alternator_ 8mo ago
It doesn't feel like you’ve thought through the nuances and implications of this policy, and the tone makes me think you don’t really want to.
- croes 8mo agoI guess it’s sarcasm
- zug_zug 8mo agoAgree on both counts… but I do. I’m sure there are systemic changes that are possible, and it’s a topic worthy of brainstorming
- renewiltord 8mo agoWhat do you mean? We all agree that billionaires shouldn’t exist. I just think that millionaires also shouldn’t. Though now that I think of it, is it okay that hundred thousand aires should exist? This Aires is definitely not Buenos.
- saulpw 8mo agoBillionaires are gross, millionaires are fine. You're committing the "slippery slope" fallacy in defense of excessive wealth inequality. (And if you genuinely believe what you're saying, recognize that your words are being taken as either disingenuous or foolish, and are having the opposite effect of promoting your cause).
- renewiltord 8mo agoAnother thing I’ve thought about is having everyone wealthier than me have a 100% wealth tax. And it’s a pity that people consider caring about inequality disingenuous and foolish while people argue that some people should be millionaires while others are starving. Millionaires should not exist.
- saulpw 8mo agoYou think you're being clever in calling me out but you're just being a troll.
- renewiltord 8mo agoCall me names but it won’t change the facts.
- Tanjreeve 8mo agoPersonally I think we should allow billionaires to exist but there's plenty of nuances and implications to the political choice of allowing individuals to accumulate more money than countries to the point they get to put their thumb on the scales of politics and make markets less free but we aren't trained to reflexively dismiss discussion of that as absurd.