Abolish Billionaires (NYT/Opinion)

[entremet]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/06/opinion/abolish-billionaires-tax.html

Last fall, Tom Scocca, editor of the essential blog Hmm Daily, wrote a tiny, searing post that has been rattling around my head ever since.

"Some ideas about how to make the world better require careful, nuanced thinking about how best to balance competing interests," he began. "Others don't: Billionaires are bad. We should presumptively get rid of billionaires. All of them."

Mr. Scocca — a longtime writer at Gawker until that site was muffled by a billionaire — offered a straightforward argument for kneecapping the wealthiest among us. A billion dollars is wildly more than anyone needs, even accounting for life's most excessive lavishes. It's far more than anyone might reasonably claim to deserve, however much he believes he has contributed to society.

At some level of extreme wealth, money inevitably corrupts. On the left and the right, it buys political power, it silences dissent, it serves primarily to perpetuate ever-greater wealth, often unrelated to any reciprocal social good. For Mr. Scocca, that level is self-evidently somewhere around one billion dollars; beyond that, you're irredeemable

Do you believe we should abolish billionaires? How would you do it? The article here talks about several ways, including a wealth tax. There are concerns that even the designation of billionaire is not too accurate since many billionaire are billionaires through stock ownership.

I have no issues with billionaire in theory, but I do think we definitely need to tax way more. Moreover, I'm concerned about their disportioncate influence in politics.

However, there is this moral quandary. Even though much of their wealth is tied to stock, it is very wrong that so much financial resources are tied to a single person when we still have major problems with clean water and access to healthcare in certain areas.

Moreover, as the article shows, not every billionaire is a philanthropist like Bill Gates. Many just horde their wealth.

 

[Strike]

"Why do you want to punish success?"

 

[SageShinigami]

Okay first off: fuck Gawker.

Second off: I really wish we knew how to title things better. I don't wanna "abolish billionaires", I want to make sure they're appropriately taxed. Not enough people are gonna agree with the former to get it done, so it just becomes some pie in the sky thing some idiot furry who calls themselves a "billionaire rights activist" can laugh at on Twitter.

 

[Polyh3dron]

tax everything someone makes over a certain amount at a very high percentage. something around the rates we had during the 50s, y'know, that time Republicans want to take us back to.

that'll pay for medicare for all and then some.

 

[SugarNoodles]

People dont seem to understand just how much money 1 billion actually is. It's an absurd amount of wealth to possess.

The fact that people, even those who will never come close to having that amount of wealth, get up in arms over the mere notion of taking a *a portion* of that wealth says all we need to know about the situation.

 

[DrArchon]

tax everything someone makes over a certain amount at a very high percentage. something around the rates we had during the 50s.

Click to shrink...

I love this idea as much as most people here, but don't forget to include safeguards (if possible) for when everyone that's wealthy enough to do it just shelters their money offshore.

 

[entremet]

Another thing. Billionaires benefit from things like good infrastructure, educated and healthy workers, and so on. It just seems wrong to want to avoid taxation when your wealth exist because of these structures.

Along with peaceful marketplace conditions.

 

[Deleted member 48897]

Do you believe we should abolish billionaires? How would you do it?

Click to shrink...

Seems straightforward enough. Take the money they have.

Hell, you could probably leave them enough money so that they're filthy rich rather than obscenely, grotesquely rich

 

[Transistor]

Okay first off: fuck Gawker.

Second off: I really wish we knew how to title things better. I don't wanna "abolish billionaires", I want to make sure they're appropriately taxed. Not enough people are gonna agree with the former to get it done, so it just becomes some pie in the sky thing some idiot furry who calls themselves a "billionaire rights activist" can laugh at on Twitter.

Click to shrink...

That's the thing, though. They need to be taxed so much that they don't have billions and can't be called billionaires.

 

[entremet]

Seems straightforward enough. Take the money they have.

Hell, you could probably leave them enough money so that they're filthy rich rather than obscenely, grotesquely rich

Click to shrink...

Most of their money is not in a Ducktales style money bin. It's tied to stock ownership, which isn't as liquid.

I'm not a corporate tax expert, so I'm wondering how that can be done. I'm aware of capital gains taxes, but I don't know they can be improved.

 

[Madison]

yeah, abolish billionaries

if you have a billion dollars or more the state should take like, a 10% of their money.

use it to fund useful shit

 

[FliX]

That's the thing, most of their money is not in a Ducktales style money bin. It's tied to stock ownership, which isn't as liquid.

Click to shrink...

Tax the dividends at exorbitant rates then.

 

[entremet]

Tax the dividends at exorbitant rates then.

Click to shrink...

Do all corporation pay out dividends? I know Apple didn't for many years and they've been amassing hundreds of billions.

 

[modoversus]

Yeah, at some point they are just hoarding wealth to make sure no one else gets it. Better to tax that and give back to the country that allowed the conditions to their success, with the intention of it giving a better quality of life to the citizens.

 

[wulfmatik]

Every billionaire is an example of the failure within the system. To correct the system and ensure that capitalism can deliver prosperity for workers everywhere, billionaires must be eradicated via taxation and seizing their wealth overseas.

Every billionaire poses a grave threat to equal democracy and even our environment, so it's imperative that we work to remove their power to benefit us all.

 

[ishan]

Yeah not for that. I dont have issues with very high taxes tho. I think 70% seems just fine. Would even be okay with higher rates depending on variety of things.

Most of their money is not in a Ducktales style money bin. It's tied to stock ownership, which isn't as liquid.

I'm not a corporate tax expert, so I'm wondering how that can be done. I'm aware of capital gains taxes, but I don't know they can be improved.

Click to shrink...

Plus this. Its mainly in stocks not just some cash lying around.

 

[FliX]

Do all corporation pay out dividends? I know Apple didn't for many years and they've been amassing hundreds of billions.

Click to shrink...

Well its the reason most people have stock... At some point they want a dividend otherwise why bother?

 

[WhoTurgled]

Fuck yes I've been seeing shit like this more and more its giving me hope for the future. Its time to have serious discussions about wealth redistribution

 

[entremet]

Well its the reason most people have stock... At some point they want a dividend otherwise why bother?

Click to shrink...

Like I said, I'm not corporate tax person, so I'm not sure. I wonder if people with expertise in that field can chime in.

 

[Planx]

Yep, but we need a constitutional amendment to be able to directly tax wealth at a federal level, so they'll remain billionaires

 

[Pandaman]

100% estate tax after 10 million, 120% credit for stocks turned over to the government. 50 years of that and the public would have a controlling interest in all the companies running us ragged.

 

[SageShinigami]

People dont seem to understand just how much money 1 billion actually is. It's an absurd amount of wealth to possess.

The fact that people, even those who will never come close to having that amount of wealth, get up in arms over the mere notion of taking a *a portion* of that wealth says all we need to know about the situation.

Click to shrink...

The poison of the American Dream is people think they'll one day make that amount of money or near it, and they don't want someone taking it.

 

[SlothmanAllen]

How exactly would you redistribute the wealth? What if people just move their assets overseas. What about billionaires in other countries? Wouldn't they still be able to influence politics/society. Wouldn't large corporations still be able to influence politicians just as they do now?

 

[Kayla]

Tax them and use the money to buy some guillotines.

 

[shnurgleton]

dayum

When American capitalism sends us its billionaires, it's not sending its best. It's sending us people who have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with them. They're bringing inequality. They're bringing injustice. They're buying politicians.

And some, I assume, are good people.

Click to shrink...

 

[WhoTurgled]

How exactly would you redistribute the wealth? What if people just move their assets overseas. What about billionaires in other countries? Wouldn't they still be able to influence politics/society. Wouldn't large corporations still be able to influence politicians just as they do now?

Click to shrink...

Good point, it does sound hard. Lets just do nothing and hope for the best

 

[Mass_Pincup]

As long as there isn't a worldwide push to this it's basically impossible to abolish billionaires. There's so many ways to circumvent something like this, especially when tax laws aren't unified.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Nah. The problem isn't billionaires. The problem is they can utilize their wealth to bribe politicians. The article should be Abolish political bribery. The rest will fix itself once the will of the people can get properly implemented w/o interference by bribery.

 

[Poppy]

until everyone in society has a decent shot at life and isnt being trampled under the boots of nigh unfettered profiteering i think there should be severe taxation

i think all failure to do so is on the hands of corrupt politicians and i think if they continue to ignore the populace for their own gains they should be torn out of office

 

[The Albatross]

I don't believe that we should "abolish billionaires." I think it's a ridiculous statement and would be horrible, non-nonsensical policy, that wouldn't work politically and wouldn't work if put into practice. There isn't a mechanism in American government, or even the most progressive European governments, to "abolish billionaires."

I think that billionaires should be progressively taxed, as opposed to what we have now where the highest tax bracket is $500,001 for an individual. Currently, as you proportionally make more money over $500,000, your proportional tax commitment goes down, which doesn't make any fiscal sense. I think tax brackets should be expanded beyond $500,000 to progressively increase, up to whatever the leading zeitgeist is today ... 70% marginal rate or what have you.

Well its the reason most people have stock... At some point they want a dividend otherwise why bother?

Click to shrink...

I'd imagine most people who hold stock are doing so in Index funds, mutual funds, or some similar vehicle where dividends only make up a nominal amount in the appreciation of the fund. Most people hold these types of investments planning for retirement, on the (true) assumption that the market gains value at a higher rate than inflation. A dividend is a nice re-investment bonus. For people in retirement, who can draw on their investments, most of their retirement income comes from the appreciation of their portfolio, not through dividends.

 

[low-G]

This definitely needs to be done, but it needs to be a sliding scale, starting well before billionaires, and effectively making being a billionaire impossible, like a 99.999% tax rate. Taxation must be much greater on the high end.

 

[shnurgleton]

I don't believe that we should "abolish billionaires." I think it's a ridiculous statement and would be horrible, non-nonsensical policy, that wouldn't work politically and wouldn't work if put into practice.

I think that billionaires should be progressively taxed, as opposed to what we have now where the highest tax bracket is $500,001 for an individual. Currently, as you proportionally make more money over $500,000, your proportional tax commitment goes down, which doesn't make any fiscal sense. I think tax brackets should be expanded beyond $500,000 to progressively increase, up to whatever the leading zeitgeist is today ... 70% marginal rate or what have you.

Click to shrink...

That's precisely what the article proposes - billionaire abollition as a policy goal, not as explicit policy.

 

[entremet]

dayum

Click to shrink...

I don't think that's a crazy statement. I don't know how I would act if I were a billionaire. I would hope I would be generous, but greed is a very universal tendency.

That's why we should not depend on human nature. It's too capricious. More progressive taxation is needed.

 

[ishan]

Also not comfortable with the idea of banning billionares. I dont believe I should put a limit on a person's wealth etc. Thats on them.

 

[Terrell]

Most of their money is not in a Ducktales style money bin. It's tied to stock ownership, which isn't as liquid.

I'm not a corporate tax expert, so I'm wondering how that can be done. I'm aware of capital gains taxes, but I don't know they can be improved.

Click to shrink...

Then you tax the corporations that billionaires tie their money up in, too. People and corporations can shelter their money from taxes, as well, but then you just introduce a major penalty for not repatriating any funds beyond overseas operating expenses, either to be paid upfront or accrues a cumulative percentage for every year not repatriated until the percentage is so high that the money can never be repatriated and is thus effectively worthless.

 

[Celcius]

I'm against this, I think people should be allowed to aim for the sky and be as successful as they can. I'm not a billionaire (at least not yet) and I have no issues with Jeff bezos and others spending their money however they want. I think part of being in a free country is having the freedom to be successful and spend your money however you want.

 

[Terrell]

I'm against this, I think people should be allowed to aim for the sky and be as successful as they can. I'm not a billionaire (at least not yet) and I have no issues with Jeff bezos and others spending their money however they want. I think part of being in a free country is having the freedom to be successful.

Click to shrink...

Ahh yes, the "temporarily embarrassed millionaire", the person that lets individuals and corporations get away with anything they want in the name of profiteering, in the vague hope they'll become one of them someday and want to be able to do the same.

 

[The Albatross]

That's precisely what the article proposes - billionaire abollition as a policy goal, not as explicit policy.

Click to shrink...

Making an argument to "abolish billionaires" who are "irredeemable human beings" is a ... rather different argument than the more sensical, and less explosive, 70% marginal tax rate on the very wealthy. Not many people proposing the 70% marginal tax rate on the very wealthy are in favor of "abolishing billionaires," because that's counter-intuitive to the idea of adding higher marginal tax rates for the very wealthy. Also, I'm different than most others around here, I'm not repulsed by the idea of billionaires, I'm repulsed by the idea of billionaires having a smaller relative tax committment than someone making $500,500/year. I don't think it's good government, good policy, and creates an unjust society.

But then again, this is a gawker article published by the NEw York Times, so I shouldn't really expect anything else than ridiculous eye-grabbing headlines.

 

[Sinfamy]

I'm against this, I think people should be allowed to aim for the sky and be as successful as they can. I'm not a billionaire (at least not yet) and I have no issues with Jeff bezos and others spending their money however they want. I think part of being in a free country is having the freedom to be successful and spend your money however you want.

Click to shrink...

You can spend your money however you want from a consumerist point of view.
The problem arises when you spend your money to purchase politicians, which you most certainly are when you have that much money, it's the single best investment you can make. Buy the government, have them deregulate and pass laws to decrease your taxes, pass the burden to the middle class.
You can buy all the private jets and yachts, I don't give a shit, but we need an election system that isn't so influenced by money.

 

[shnurgleton]

Also not comfortable with the idea of banning billionares. I dont believe I should put a limit on a person's wealth etc. Thats on them.

Click to shrink...

I'm against this, I think people should be allowed to aim for the sky and be as successful as they can. I'm not a billionaire (at least not yet) and I have no issues with Jeff bezos and others spending their money however they want. I think part of being in a free country is having the freedom to be successful and spend your money however you want.

Click to shrink...

again, folks, read the article. this isn't necessarily about putting a hard cap on earnings, but addressing the structures in place that produce the massive level of inequality we have today. the prevalence of billionaires is the symptom, not the problem

 

[Kill3r7]

Nah. The problem isn't billionaires. The problem is they can utilize their wealth to bribe politicians. The article should be Abolish political bribery. The rest will fix itself once the will of the people can get properly implemented w/o interference by bribery.

Click to shrink...

Yep except that will never happen. It is something humanity has struggled with since time immemorial. The is no country in the world that is not impervious to corruption.

 

[Celcius]

Ahh yes, the "temporarily embarrassed millionaire", the person that lets individuals and corporations get away with anything they want in the name of profiteering, in the vague hope they'll become one of them someday and want to be able to do the same.

Click to shrink...

I think that's a bit of a stretch. I'm not saying people should be able to get away with anything, I'm saying we shouldn't just take their money because we've decided that they have too much.

 

[EdibleKnife]

I'm against this, I think people should be allowed to aim for the sky and be as successful as they can. I'm not a billionaire (at least not yet) and I have no issues with Jeff bezos and others spending their money however they want. I think part of being in a free country is having the freedom to be successful and spend your money however you want.

Click to shrink...

Except too many billionares use their money to limit the freedom of others by buying political favor. The are functionally not competing at the same level as middle, lower class and even upper class people when their wealth can literally trump the votes of hundreds and thousands of people.

I think that's a bit a stretch. I'm not saying people should be able to get away with anything, I'm saying we shouldn't just take their money because we've decided that they have too much.

Click to shrink...

If they have enough to tip the scales in their favor then it is too much.

 

[Deleted member 2761]

I agree. While one can argue that the amount of wealth a few billionaires choose to sink into philanthropy is substantial, the fact that they remain billionaires despite all that means that they are still clinging to an obscenely unnecessary amount of wealth.

 

[mutantmagnet]

Nah. The problem isn't billionaires. The problem is they can utilize their wealth to bribe politicians. The article should be Abolish political bribery. The rest will fix itself once the will of the people can get properly implemented w/o interference by bribery.

Click to shrink...

Nah you're wrong. Billionaires are a bigger problem than the bribes.


For example even if you stop the bribes the wealth disparity even among billionaires with wealth inflated by stock options means there is a lot of dividend payouts that is funneled into 20 people at the expense of millions of people who could benefit from more robust 401Ks.

 

[Deleted member 48897]

I'm against this, I think people should be allowed to aim for the sky and be as successful as they can. I'm not a billionaire (at least not yet) and I have no issues with Jeff bezos and others spending their money however they want. I think part of being in a free country is having the freedom to be successful and spend your money however you want.

Click to shrink...

I don't know how familiar you are with the argument on the paradox of savings but one of the reasons everything sucks is that folks like Bezos have a lot of money and there's a lot of it they're not spending

 

[FliX]

I'd imagine most people who hold stock are doing so in Index funds, mutual funds, or some similar vehicle where dividends only make up a nominal amount in the appreciation of the fund. Most people hold these types of investments planning for retirement, on the (true) assumption that the market gains value at a higher rate than inflation. A dividend is a nice re-investment bonus. For people in retirement, who can draw on their investments, most of their retirement income comes from the appreciation of their portfolio, not through dividends.

Click to shrink...

Most people yes, Billionaires? not sure.

 

[Rendering...]

No human being needs or deserves a billion dollars. If you have even a tenth of a billion dollars you'll never have to work a day in your life, and all luxuries and comforts are available to you.

 

[mutantmagnet]

Also not comfortable with the idea of banning billionares. I dont believe I should put a limit on a person's wealth etc. Thats on them.

Click to shrink...

When you tax billionaires they are always at the risk of not earning enough post taxes to not be billionaires any more.

Do you believe then that taxes should be abolished?


If you think that question was rightly absurd then reflect on how your interpretation of abolish billionaires is equally absurd.

 

[Maolfunction]

Hell, a 70% wealth tax is still too low. Do 90%, or even 95%. That still leaves them with 100 million or 50 million dollars to their name, which is still an absurdly large amount of money to make in a year. There's literally no good reason that any individual needs more money than that in our society.