Surely there's a point where having more money makes no functional difference, other than to mogg your fellow moneymoggers.

Allowing people to have up to $50m would incentivize success while preventing disgusting amounts of wealth and power from accumulating in the hands of people who weren't even elected.

Yes lets take money from people that have accumulated a certain amount of wealth and give it to people who spend their entire paychecks on iphone payments and mercedes leases. This will surely drive further innovation.

Wed actually be better off giving more money to the ultra wealthy rather than taking it from them. They are using that money more efficiently, that's why they are where they are.

Besides who would the rest of the money go to? Probably taxes and government is the least efficient entity that exists.

You could come up with some creative ideas though. Like tax breaks for investing in small start ups where owners have less than $1 million networth or something. That way you can get those billionaires to pull their money out of big corps and invest it into the next generations businesses. Not sure on details haven't thought that through but there might be something like that, that could possibly work.

But just stealing money from successful people and giving it to either government or non successful people is just a disaster.

guess that's Elon Musk screwed

Why should anyone be allowed?

Well, if they generate enough income and save up that much, then they have $50 million dollars. And if they then make $1.00, they have more than $50 million.

Now you, why shouldn't anyone be allowed to have $50 million dlllars.

Why should anyone be allowed to poison someone? Well, if they feed that person 1mg of poison, then that person has 1mg of poison in their bloodstream. And then if they feed them more poison, then that person dies.

Now you, why should anyone be allowed to poison someone?

this

If all wealth was equally distributed, not long after the rich would be rich and the poor would be poor.



Its not often someone wins the lottery and stays rich srs.

I think you have a good idea, OP, but taxing the rich is largely ineffective due to loopholes. The tax system actually targets the poor, not the rich. Also, humans are too dumb, selfish and addicted to stuff like drugs and materialistic possessions to share money and actually have it trickle down in an effective way.

The upper class making hundreds of millions per year are already building business empires that pretty much everyone uses daily (amazon, walmart, etc). We need billionaires like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos to keep things running and competitive. People like the convenience their rich overlords provide them, that's just the sad truth. Capitalism is why the USA is great compared to actually oppressive nations that don't give their citizens the freedom to create and succeed. Money is an incentive and life would suck without an incentive.

You give a dumb poor person lots of money and they'll just go out and spend it all on stupid chit they don't even need, and they'll barely give back to society or enrich their own family. These smart wall street and silicon valley people have millions because they know to invest it back into society and make even more money. They're the ones developing vaccines, pumping out computers, making reliable cars, producing the entertainment we all enjoy like AAA video games and hollywood movies, etc. Life would be pretty bleak without all that stuff, and I think it is fair to be a multi-millionaire in this day and age.

Lol at complaining about the rich while standing in line to buy the latest iPhone.

I don't vouch for Capitalism, but people can only blame themselves for getting others wealthy. Stop buying name brand crap, stop buying from Amazon, Apple, and Microsoft, etc. Hell most of those things aren't even necessary. Everytime you buy from them you line their pockets

It's not hard, a majority of Americans want their cake and want to eat it

A lot of you aren't being honest with yourselves. You don't need $50,000,000 in your bank account. You can live in any city in the world on $25,000,000. I would go as far as to say people who feel the need to have more and more and more wealth shouldn't have that type of power. I fail to see how earning $10,000,000 instead of $60,000,000 would de-incentivise me from creating a business.

Everything else is bootlicker talking points.

Why should anyone have their net worth capped in a country built on the foundation of freedom & liberty? Why would anyone feel like they have the right to tell someone else how much money they're allowed to have? The entitlement/victimhood mentality in our country drives me crazy. Society doesn't owe you anything just for being born. If you want something, go out and earn it. Stop imagining that the rest of the world owes you anything.

This is the most devastating piece of modern republican ideology that has endured. Sad.

Laffer economics has been largely discredited, both in theory and in practice (look up Kansas circa 2017). I promise you that rich ppl are not taking their tax credits and generously passing those on to the working class. Hence, why wages have stagnated since the 1980s (i.e., around the time repubs embraced Laffer).Not allowing seems crazy. Just tax higher marginal incomes at higher rates -- problem solved.Bezos himself isn't doing any of that, his company his. A few thoughts:

- fix the tax code so that it taxes the rich at higher rates, period. The reason there are so many "loopholes" is that both repubs and dems are aligned in helping the rich and letting everyone else fight over scraps

- keep taxes on corporations etc. low to incentivize keeping money in the corporations, investments, R&D, etc.

I fail to see how hiring people and paying them low wages as beneficial, but maybe you can explain that. Investors are also a problem with the system seeing as they're willing to do anything, immoral or not, to gain a profit.

You'd rather work 9 to 5 instead of create a business because Uncle Sam is taking 50% of your $50,000,000 profit? That's pretty silly if you ask me.

FYI you can still be wealthy in a socialist country if done right. So what are you complaining about again?

ITT: Spineless centrists with no understanding of economics, investing, and saving, try to justify wealth redistribution

It would be nice if human beings were a bit more selfless and altruistic as a species, if we helped each other out and took care of one another, but the reality is that we're base apes still being driven by defunct, obsolete evolutionary impulses from millennia ago. We think about our own survival and livelihood first. In terms of our brains, it's like we're trying to run high-end software on an old clunky machine. That machine is the human brain that has not changed significantly in thousands of years.

Simple math

Let’s say you take 2 trillion dollars with your movement (probably exaggerated) leaving everyone that had over 50 million with 50 million and you distribute it to everyone with less than 2 million net worth.

% of Families at or below 2 million in net worth = 93.5% of the country.

Roughly 84 million families in the USA.

.935 * 84 = 78.5 million getting a check

2 trillion/78.5 million = 25,400 a year to those families

So maybe you only give it to the bottom 50% of the country - net worth about 122,000

That’s 2 tril/42 million = 47k that year

This will be the biggest year because people that have 50 million will have zero incentive to make more. But let’s say the 27000 people that gave up the 2 trillion quit being human and all of them added 20% the next year

20% = 10 mill * 27k = 270 billion

270 billion/42 million = 6400 to each family


Now compare that to what happens currently.

I’ll pick a few billionaire companies wal mart, Google, Amazon, and Microsoft

Between them they employ about 3.5 million people

If the average salary across the board for that 3.5 million was 15/hr they just generated 109 billion for those employees.

If you make it closer to what it is at 25/hr that’s 182 billion.

Now consider all the other companies that 100+ millionaires own - that employ many more millions and do the math yourself.

Short answer is by doing what they’re doing they are actually giving more people more money then if they donated every cent they have to the lower-middle class and they are able to maintain it year over year.

If you can’t figure that out then you don’t need to be designing the monetary system for everyone trying to feed their families. Is it perfect, no, does it work? Yes for 100s of millions of people it does.

Engineers make up a very small percentage of Tesla/Amazon/Wal-Mart. What about the smaller folks? The warehouse workers, retail folks, truck drivers? The same people who don't get holidays or PTO?

So you'd rather be average because Uncle Sam only leaves you with $25,000,000. You aren't mentally right in the head. FYI you can be wealthy in a socialist society if done right, so why are you angry again?

Why should anyone be allowed to have more than $100k dollars?

Don’t forget squeezing by every year on sub 5% or even negative profit margins for the first few years. Why are you so greedy? Do you really need that $2000 to reinvest into your business? Why don’t you give it to Tyrone’s community, they need the welfare much more than you who actually provides jobs and goods/services for the community.

Jfc at econ brainlets.How about I just fire everyone and move the jobs to China or automate them since you keep killing my profits?

And what do you think companies do with their profits? Hide it under their CEO’s sofa? Very weak trolling, sad!

This is how I think of the rich. I fail to see the wealthy looking out for the little guy. For example, Wal-Mart took away paid Holidays from all it associates. That's why we have Government and Unions. Without Government and Unions we'd be living like the Industrial Revolution. And even then, Government and Unions still don't do what they're supposed to do and in some cases have too much power.

The fact that your brought this up shows how selfish you are for no apparent reason. Fire all Americans, I'd like to see the outcome of that. Wonder what would happen. More poor folks? Government taxes you even more? Americanized French Revolution with guns?

Needing more and more wealth is greedy and selfish. There's no other way to spin it. You have enough to live a luxurious life anywhere in the world, but want more?

buy high, sell low

I once thought this retarded idea could work before reading any economic literature or understanding how economies function. It doesn't seem like you have thought this one through, OP. Start reading.

If what you say is so right, we wouldn't need government intervention and Unions. Industrial Revolution with a real time period in America. Or how about other historical time periods the wealthy took advantage of their workers? But I'll leave you to it, the wealthy definitely looks out for average joes. Just look at all the competition that gets bought up

I'm halfway through a Master's in financial planning buddy

But let me guess you are a student of PragerU so now you know everything about economics?

This is not selfish, this is basic decision making. If I do not improve my profits to lower the price of my products/services or provide higher quality, my competitors will eventually take my market share and I will go out of business.

Fire all Americans? You want to see the outcome? We ALREADY HAVE THAT. Look at our manufacturing industry. You want to know what would happen? ALL THE FACTORIES moved to Mexico, China, Japan, Vietnam, etc.. Our economy has been CRIPPLED with Socialist policies suggested by RETARDS like you since 1913.

Needing more and more wealth is how you grow your business and provide more goods and services at a higher quality and lower price for consumes. That is greedy and selfish? A consensual trade which improves the quality of life for both parties is greedy and selfish? You think you can spin profits into selfish luxury? I ask you again: what do you think companies are doing with profits? What luxurious life? Our economy has been stagnating since 1913. America's share of world wealth and trade surplus has been falling since the 50s. Wages have been outpaced by inflation and cost of living with debt exploding out of control since the 70s. What the fukc luxurious life you looking at?

Why do you need more profits if you already profited $25,000,000 after tax?? That's enough to live anywhere in the world

As far as lower cost, that is wrong. New technology with barely any changes charge a hefty premium. The price of cars constantly go up with little to no innovation. What are these cheap prices you speak of?

History shows the wealthy do not look after average joe, so again what are you all talking about? If it wasn't for Government and Unions we would still be living in the Industrial Revolution era

This is the third time I'm going to ask you. What the fukc do you think companies do with profits?

"The price of cars constantly go up with little to no innovation"

That's from inflation you stupid retard. Do you retain any information I just typed out or are you just illiterate?

"What are these cheap prices you speak of"

Maybe the billions in retail goods we are getting yearly in our trade deficit? Does that give you any ideas? Do you buy clothing? Purchase from internet sites? Use bodybuilding.com which utilizes Amazon web hosting services, of which has been getting cheaper every year?