LogFAQs > #979016522

LurkerFAQs, Active Database ( 12.01.2023-present ), DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear
Topic List
Page List: 1
TopicUS Rep wants to raise Minimum Wage to $50 Bucks an Hour...
adjl
02/24/24 8:57:09 AM
#29:


Count_Drachma posted...
That and we aren't in a post-labor society where UBI could function.

Virtually every UBI/minimum income experiment conducted has been successful in that it shows overall improvement in pretty much every regard, but sure, keep repeating that dogmatic mantra like it means something.

Count_Drachma posted...
Except net worth isn't billions of dollars that they have, it's holdings in companies where the valuation of the company's shares is volatile.

Which can be liquidated. I'm not sure why you insist on conflating "net worth isn't just a big bucket of money" (which is true) with "net worth can't be compared to liquid assets in any way." Trying to downplay the wealth of the world's wealthiest people is a really weird hobby.

Count_Drachma posted...
While "okay, you're successful, we want to take a good chunk of your money" is questionable, suggesting "okay, you're successful, we want to take over your company" is straight-up Soviet.

It doesn't have to mean the government taking over the company. Just that if a company becomes successful enough that a shareholder becomes a billionaire, that shareholder needs to sell off shares (and spend the proceeds) or otherwise reduce the value of the company until their net worth drops below that threshold. That can take the form of passing the reins to somebody else, profit sharing within the company, choosing not to expand further once the company has reached the threshold... All of it works out to avoid leaving too much power in the hands of any one individual or company, which is the goal. If the individual doesn't drop their net worth by the required amount within whatever time frame is defined (like if your net worth breaks $1 billion, you have two months to reduce it), that's when the government can step in and tax the excess by forcing the sale of shares/claiming liquid assets.

Also, I'm not sure which version of history you're reading in which Soviet citizens were allowed to freely gain wealth up to a point where it was beyond question that they could live out the rest of their lives in absolute luxury and never want for anything before the government would collect anything in excess of that, but I imagine most actual Soviet citizens would prefer to live in that reality instead of the one they got.

---
This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.
... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List
Page List: 1