Solid agree from me. I love the idea of a wealth/asset tax*.
I’m not sure where the line lies, and I haven’t done the math to see where 3x the global 10% lands, but I think that is likely too small and would impact most of the ‘first world’ citizens who aren’t the problem, but a rolling plan to start higher and move down seems sound. If you start at everyone worth >$10Billion, you’ll have better luck selling this idea than if you start with everyone worth >$10k.
If everyone had all the resources they needed, there would likely be little innovation, but that innovation would be from the passionate.
But we’ve seen in the past few years that when all the resources are pooled, the owning class stops innovating and moves into hoarding instead and the motive moves to extracting value instead of creating it.
There is a happy middle ground somewhere, where people can be rewarded for work that adds value to society but not be incentivized to hoard it and others can choose to not add to society but still live a satisfying life.
*Your idea is a little nicer than mine, which is that we identify an absurd personal wealth line, like $10B (tied to some economic indicator), and then anyone over that line is executed and their property is returned to society and not inherited. Build in a grace period, so you have like a year to divest if you pass the threshold. That will heavily disincentivize hoarding.
Solid agree from me. I love the idea of a wealth/asset tax*.
I’m not sure where the line lies, and I haven’t done the math to see where 3x the global 10% lands, but I think that is likely too small and would impact most of the ‘first world’ citizens who aren’t the problem, but a rolling plan to start higher and move down seems sound. If you start at everyone worth >$10Billion, you’ll have better luck selling this idea than if you start with everyone worth >$10k.
If everyone had all the resources they needed, there would likely be little innovation, but that innovation would be from the passionate. But we’ve seen in the past few years that when all the resources are pooled, the owning class stops innovating and moves into hoarding instead and the motive moves to extracting value instead of creating it.
There is a happy middle ground somewhere, where people can be rewarded for work that adds value to society but not be incentivized to hoard it and others can choose to not add to society but still live a satisfying life.
*Your idea is a little nicer than mine, which is that we identify an absurd personal wealth line, like $10B (tied to some economic indicator), and then anyone over that line is executed and their property is returned to society and not inherited. Build in a grace period, so you have like a year to divest if you pass the threshold. That will heavily disincentivize hoarding.