You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
1 point
*

Not all of that money goes to the developer, but also to the seller places and other places. You’d also still have to pay income tax.

Ideally, there’d just be a 100% income and wealth tax after having say, 1/10,000,000th of the world’s total GDP. Without any loopholes.

With a world GDP of approx. $ 102 trillion, or 102 billion if you use the long scale, that is about $ 10.2 million you would have at max.

I think it fair up until then, exploited after that. With that money, you can practically buy anything to your heart’s content anyways.

How about more brackets?

– Practical scenario –

Suppose you had a wealth of 10 billion. The lowest bracket is a 3 billionth of the world’s income, so say 34k. That’s taxed 0%.

The lower middle is from there til 1.6 billionth of that income, around 64k. Taxed 35%.

Upper middle, around 1.6 billionth til 1 billionth (around 100k), taxed 65%.

Upper, around 1 billionth til 1 millionth (10 million) of world’s GDP, has about 99%.

Highest has 1 millionth and beyond. Let’s assume the world’s GDP is 100 trillion for ease of calculation.


So, you have 10 billion. 10 bil - 10 mil. 9.99 bil, all removed, used for public works.

10 mil - 100k, 9.9 mil. Taxing 99% of that 9.9 mil gets 99k.

And so on, until you have a smaller but respectable amount to play with.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I think you misunderstand me. I don’t strictly disagree with anything you’ve said. I’m not sure that I’m on the 100% tax above a certain threshold idea, but I’m not terrible interested in debating it one way or another.

The point I was interested in was what makes it inherently exploitative to earn that much money? You repeat the claim (and clarify) that making anything above 10mil is exploitative, but what I’m curious about is the justification.

Typically, my understanding of when people say billionaires exploited the working class, it’s because they are pocketing the excess value of those that they employ. But we have real world cases of billionaires who employ no one.

In those cases, what have they done that is exploitative?

And to further clarify. I’m not asking why it’s unjust from an equity standpoint. I’m not asking why it would be better if that wealth was taxed. I’m specifically asking after the word exploitative.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Asklemmy

!asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Create post

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it’s welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Icon by @Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de

Community stats

  • 9.1K

    Monthly active users

  • 5.9K

    Posts

  • 321K

    Comments