Lets test the theory - eviltoast
  • hellofriend@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    See, what I don’t like about this is that if you have the power to confiscate a billionaire’s possessions for no other reason that they’re a billionaire, then there’s absolutely nothing stopping you from turning that power against anyone you don’t like. And I’m not talking “you” as in you specifically, or anyone with a sense of morality and ethics, but “you” as in the inevitable exploitative scum that would at some point hold that power.

    Now, if the confiscation is contingent on a billionaire commiting a crime then that’s another thing, but then the billionaire would actually have to commit a crime. And if you made tax law ironclad then sure, if they break the law then they should have their things confiscated in recompense. But that’s assuming that the trial wouldn’t be bogged down in court by a billionaire being able to throw money at the problem.

    • Malfeasant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 months ago

      you have the power to confiscate a billionaire’s possessions for no other reason that they’re a billionaire, then there’s absolutely nothing stopping you from turning that power against anyone you don’t like.

      This is already how it is for poor people…

      contingent on a billionaire commiting a crime

      Weird how so many crimes are the things poor people do out of desperation rather than the things rich people do to coerce poor people to do the things poor people don’t want to do…

    • whotookkarl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      You seem to be under the assumptions that hoarding vast wealth to the point of extreme inequality is benign and not damaging to society & individuals living in that type of civilization, and that limiting extreme wealth inequality for billionaires means they’re coming for everyone next with no limits. These are some of the main ingredients in cooking an oligarchy soup.

      • hellofriend@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        No, I’m well aware that it’s damaging and I’m not a proponent of the system. You would do well not to make assumptions. My problem is that the people that take power are rarely the ones who will use it with temperance. I see no way that the same laws used to penalize the accumulation of wealth wouldn’t be applied to dissidents regardless of class. Rather than having an oligarchy of private citizens, you’ll have an oligarchy of people with government powers. At least in the current system there’s a degree of separation. What’s needed is a way to strengthen the people, not to punish the wealthy. And I have some ideas for that, but I doubt any would be feasible.