Name a single reason why multi-billionaires shouldn't be be made slightly poorer in order to make everyone else...

Name a single reason why multi-billionaires shouldn't be be made slightly poorer in order to make everyone else significantly richer

Becuase the land mass isn’t divided like wealth earners.

Prices would rise as a consequence of increased money mobility. Which means you woud get nothing out of it. Thats just 1 of hungreds of reasons.

one has a right to their earned property, others do not.

Then there’s no incentive to be rich if the leeches will suck you dry. You may be happy with a certain way of living, but believe it or not their are people who aspire for more. If they give, they should give on their terms. Not because they are forced to

Wealth only exists due to disparity. You wouldn't be making anyone "significantly richer", you'd simply be causing a correlated rise in inflation.

Two words. Capital Flight.

Because it wouldn’t accomplish shit?

>steal one billion dollars from rich white guy
>divide by 300 million people.

Congrats on your extra three dollars, fuck stick.

I know it's a bait thread so sage and shit but how exactly do communist plan on distributing the wealth of the rich? The moment the idea of distributing the wealth makes it to congress all the 1% simply move their wealth to off shore accounts and thus is untouchable. How exactly do they plan on doing it?

This guy gets it. The billionaires we hear about are merely the ones too stupid or naive to hide their wealth

wealth doesn't mean cold hard cash. bill gates might be worth tens of billions, but that doesn't mean he has tens of billions laying around as pocket change. and if you honestly gave the poor free money, how do you think they would spend it? sodas, cigarettes, liquor, and other comfort goods that would not benefit them at all.

because you are relying on the government to do the redistribution and they will always redistribute it to themselves

The patricians have bought too much land and are running everyday romans out of business with their imported slave labor. How are free men supposed to make ends meet without land or a job? Something should be done lest the republic be endangered

STOP EATING

If I was given 2 grand (like this tax season) I'd simply buy a new bed, fix up parts on my truck and if i have any left over help my parents

>rumblings of congress seeking to redistribute wealth
>suddenly every american billionaire and their wealth disappear to far off lands in the blink of an eye
Commies are functionally retarded

gib monies, mofucka.

So you admit to be hostages to rich people and therefore cannot go against their interest, even if a higher taxation is maintained in reasonable tresholds.
Talk about the Land of the “Free”.

People who do not own land or wealth lack the agency to gain it or the self awareness to appreciate or curate it if you gave it to them.

>All taxation is theft of your earned property

Have fun living in Somalia I guess.

>GIVE ME YOUR STUFF REEEEEEEEEEEEE

Fucking low life commie piece of shit. Earn your keep or keep the fuck away.

What are we going to do, take one of Jeff Bezos' expertly run warehouses and hand the keys over to some bum of the street? That's why he's "rich." He runs warehouses, cloud compute services, and, now, physical stores.

It's not like he's sitting on a 1 billion dollar couch in a 50 billion dollar mansion, watching a 30 billion dollar tv eating 10 billion dollars worth of chocolate bonbons, like commies imagine.

>Jeff Bezos is worth 121 billion
>convert all that to cash through some miracle
>US population is 325 million
>121/0.325 = 372
>destroy the most successful man in the world for less than a week's salary
>he and other rich people will never bother contributing anything anymore
>entire nation is in ruins
>all the poor people you wanted to help starve to death
I see you purchased the "communism has never been tried" starter pack.

Yeah because the kardashians work so hard for their millions lmao.

You’re misrepresenting the argument in a way that makes you look like a dipshit. Levying a reasonable tax based on income isn’t a shitty idea. You’d have to be a kike not to want the rich put down a notch, desu.

>Thinking billionaires dint take advantage of yiu dumbass poor people to make profit


K

What gives you a right to the money people freely give to them?

>we are held hostage by billionaires choosing whether or not to spend money
>held hostage by threat of them never existing
Such a marxist mentality out of you.

That's the natural state of the world dude.

No one is forcing you to buy their shit or work at their businesses. People have free will. Hark work and intelligence pays off.

>You’d have to be a kike not to want the rich put down a notch, desu.
Yeah, are we going to pretend that jews aren't mostly very left leaning and love the idea of taxing the rich? Are we going to pretend like the father of communism wasn't a jew? Are we going to pretend like the bolsheviks weren't mostly jews?

Calling someone a kike for normal, white, sensibilities while claiming that the "real" white stance is what most jews want is one of the dumbest things I've read today.

If you're jealous of someone's success and wealth, imitate the actions that brought it to them.

Start by reading The Richest Man in Babylon. There are audio books online too.

>You’d have to be a kike not to want the rich put down a notch
literally a kike slave mentality

Because it doesn't work you stupid fucking commie

Its not people earning millions i have a problem with
Its people who never spend their money so more and more gets sucked out the economy
They should be forced to spend their money
This has been a thought of mine for a while but if one of you can explain why it wouldn't work i would like to hear it

Jews are rich, they would love less taxes you fucking retard. Holy shit do nazis even believe in anything besides literally

>jews are evil geniuses that rule the world
>black people kill each other so lets kill them all

Some people aren't blinded by jealous rage. You can bring yourself up without bringing others down.

You don't stop poverty by bringing the rich into poverty.

>They should be forced to spend their money

That's literally what taxes are.

The point was that the amount of wealth the rich hold is pocket change when shared among the US population. You could bump up taxes to 90% and I'd wager that still wouldn't even cover the deficit spending, let alone improve quality of life. The only way to get anything done is to take everything they have and even that desperate single use measure wouldn't amount to much. I'm all for increasing taxes on the rich by a little bit but stop talking like it's actually going to help the poor or something. Lying doesn't make people accept your arguments.

>they would love less taxes you fucking retard
Jews are also in control of the organizations that receive tax money, thus they would love more taxes you fucking retard.
Jews despise rich goyim more than they despise poor goyim. Poor goyim are easily trapped by credit schemes.

If the U.S land mass were representative of the fucks I gave about what a fucking communist has to say about anything.

Ironic considering you dumb cunts hate jews for being rich

If money isn't spent, it's essentially out of circulation. Lower supply, higher demand, higher spending power. So even if they don't spend their money, your own money has higher buying power because of it.

However, since inflation exists, more and more money is being printed, the money they are holding loses its value since there are ever increasing amounts of it in circulation. They are incentivised to invest it or lose out on value. When money is invested, money is doing work.

You fuckers need to learn basic economics. Stop living in a fairy tale land where you ignore empirical evidence.

Hateful AND poor. Sad way to live.

>Attributing bullshit to people
Is this a triggered Jew? Are feelings getting in the way of logic?

Held hostage because you cannot consider any form of reform, be it tax or whatever else that might go against the will of the almighty.
Meanwhile everyone else may not have this privilege and must accept to pay whatever those higher-ups tell them.
Don’t get me wrong, I am against stupid high inheritance/estate taxes as well fortune taxes (communist french shit).
So sad to see even you people are owned and ruled by a handful of people. How the mighty have fallen.

>It's okay for billionaires to own 90% of the wealth
>Because that money just blinks out of existence
>Therefore your 10% is worth more

Congrats on the stupidest post I've read today.

We should also gas them

Fact is, the majority of people are stupid with money. The more they make, the more they spend on things that won't continue to increase their wealth.

People don't float to the top by random chance. Learn the ways to make and keep money, and to make your money work for you. Each dollar you have is a slave, willing to work and to make you another dollar, which itself is willing to work for you.

Money multiplies for the man willing to learn how, and falls through the fingers of the man who isn't.

Wealth distribution only works in nationalistic ethnic societies

>dude some ppl r supr rich n not rlly hlping out the wrld so lts like hav communist revlushun that shuld sholve it all XD XD XD
This is what you sound like.

because they'll just move and go somewhere they don't pay as high taxes
>spread da wealth
doesn't work
the only way to get the rich to benefit less rich people is to make it more lucrative for them to spend their money in american soil rather than other countries
by buying American products and American materials for them to build new business ventures that hire Americans
just blatantly raise their taxes or try to force rich people to do anything just makes them move or transfer their money to foreign banks or foreign businesses

you
cannot
force
the rich
to give you
their
money

If they do not spend it, your own value increases.

If they do spend it, it is being circulated and creating value.

What's hard to understand?

You realize all that money would be going back into businesses and creating more jobs??

...

Because you're a kike and you wouldn't take that wealth from fellow kikes.

Tell that to China, the next super power thats going to rape USA with russia.

>>muh muh muh inequality


FREEDOM THATS WHY YOU COMMIE FUCK!

I can't get behind communism because of faggots
>Everyone that has more than me needs to give me free stuff!
>What do you mean I'm one of the 20% richest in the world. I'm not sharing mine REEEE

wtf I love communism now

I've noticed we're repeating the fall of the Republic of Rome and its birth into an Empire.

We don't hate jews for being rich, we hate them for how they use their wealth

1 post by a commie faggot.
SAGE

The rationale is that future potential multi-billionaires will have less incentive in that case and this lowers the likelihood that they make their revolutionary product/technology/innovation. By giving them unrestrained profit you maximize the potential for economic growth

>imagine a pasture
>imagine

wow, such empiricism. such history.

Are you saying this rhetorically or have you never tried to understand how China works?
tl;dr benefits of the market without pesky redistributive shit like OP proposed. The wealth distribution itself is as capitalist as it gets in China.
Granted, it benefits the population because wealth in general has grown, but there are literal millionaire castes linked to the ruling party.

Pretty much, but what will the empire look like? Anglo sphere? American empire?

>GIBBS BECAUSE I'M LAZY AND YOU WORKED HARD FOR IT!!
All commies must hang.

Uncooked and bloody.

What about the collorary argument, that there are a lot of potential artists and innovators who can't refine their product because all their time is spent trying to aquire basic necessities?

"Free" doesn't mean "free from getting bribed", but it instead says "free to give bribes if I have the capital to do it"

>tragedy of the commons has not empirical evidence or historical examples

Interesting to see someone attacking anti-communist argument by trying to bring evidence and history into the matter.

>So sad to see even you people are owned and ruled by a handful of people
You see what is allowed to be seen.

Tell me who benefits from a loan into a company with stock as compensation: the loaner or the loan taker?
I still don't understand how you think it is the billionaire taking advantage of people when he refuses to let them spend his money as they see fit. Or rather I understand how you think it, but that just means you are brainwashed by the marxism that is rampant in South America.

I honestly doubt a 1% to 5% decrease in the potential future wealth perceived by thus hypotethical billionaire would make him opt not to work as hard.
Would consider this in a 40-50% decrease some communist fuckers so desire.

Trickle down should technically fulfill "basic needs", in theory

economics is a bit above his learning ability

Says the lazy white trash that lives with his family and probably never learned to clean his own room

How do you filter out the true greats from the rubbish? I say the market does it. Someone with truly great potential will find the means to succeed. What you suggest is to find those greats who have demonstrated that they exist and succeed, and to take their well earned gains to give to those that have proven nothing.

Us land mass is divided like US wealth. Individuals own property the size of delaware while the bottom 40% rents and will never own any land.

The reason why not to tax them at a higher rate? I'm fine with a progressive tax structure. Trump even advocates a progressive tax structure. It is efficient because it is the only working way to pay for services and it prevents too much wealth from concentrating at the top instead of being reinvested. Our current system works, if anything maybe dial it back a bit. However there is a very good reason for not going full retard like france. Either with incredibly strict progressive brackets or worse an outright tax on wealth. The reason is that it simply doesn't work. They move the vast majority of capital out of your country to where it is no longer taxed OR invested. Sure you can catch or prevent some portion of it but in the long run it is shooting yourself in the foot.

Because I have no claim on that which others have worked for. And neither do you.

It isn't about percent decrease, it is about opportunity cost. Why should they keep wealth in one country where it grows 12% a year when they can keep it in another country where it grows 20% a year?

Go fuck yourself, canacuck. Gf and I live together, and my room is always clean.

This isn't even a real problem in the case of individual rich people, by just hypothetically speaking if rich people were hoarding so much money they were actually draining significant demand out of the economy this would not be a good thing because of some Quantity of Money theory effect on demand. In the first place the demand of any group of individuals for the consumer goods all of us are buying is going to likely be constrained to the amount of those consumer goods they themselves would buy normally as an individual. If me an everyone else in America is buying Dole OJ, Jeff Bezos probably only buys marginally more Dole OJ at best, as a single person.

Jeff Bezos also hypothetically gets paid based on how many people are spending money into his company. So he is receiving our money. If he starts hoarding our money instead of paying it back out as wages, or buying other things that then return to wages, net buying power for everybody else goes down. It's not that we have the same amount of money and Bezos money came out of heaven, he hoarded it and made ours more valuable. He is receiving money from consumers that he then theoretically hoards. That constriction on the supply of money circulating is going to cause demand to shrink, which will cause businesses to shrink their costs by laying people off and not producing as much. Our economy shrinks and we all get poorer, though Bezos is so rich it doesn't really matter to him in this scenario because he gets his OJ an yachts whether a million more people are unemployed or not.

No, the rich people aren't our hostages and we can't just steal their money. I wonder if you are even able to comprehend the difference.

You can take away money from billionaires as long as it wont be going to welfare americans
Just by getting rid of the illegals and ending welfare most americans will be richer

He can't because that is how they treat the wealthy in Brazil. Which is why no one likes to invest there.

Consider the minimum amount of money needed to make the essential government functions work.
Why is there no reason for those who most benefitted from that structure to contribute to that in a higher proportion, especially considering the diminished marginal utility from that money.
I’m not talking about or defending the government giving gibs, merely having functioning roads, courts, legislative councils etc. How is that not reasonable?
Abolish all gibs unless people are literally living in the mud.

Brah we're about to automate our entire fucking transportation sector, and half of our service sector.

Tying everyone's societal worth purely to how much wealth they can generate means that you will effectively consider 99% of people worthless, including yourself, unless you happen to be a CEO who benefits from laying off their whole workforce.

...

You hit the nail on the head there. You'd be surprised at how little savings people have tucked away. If my wealth were rated as to my earning power, I'd rank easily in the bottom 50 percent of Americans. If I were rated by assets, I would barely squeak into the top 4 percent.

Most Americans have less than $1,000 in savings, don't own their home or cars (they are making payments), and have few actual assets worth any significant amount to their name. I have a crappy job but I don't spend a lot and everything I have has been paid off years ago.

Tragedy of the commons was an argument made in retrospect to justify the enclosures, which were a political movement. There are historical documents that show the arguments made at the time, which were basically "these are shiftless peasants on their historical lands they've farmed for centuries the same way, and we industrialists could make that land way more productive". It should be clear that the commons weren't a problem because they were the norm in Europe for most of the feudal period.

And this isn't to defend the commons particularly. Even Marx, though he despised the treatment of the peasants who were moved into the cities, believed that the capitalism which arose out of displacing the peasants was the greatest progressive force in history. Feudalism was much worse, as far as he was concerned.

Getting into the top 10 percent isn't that hard.

Your argument is based on envy and nothing else, so go kill yourself like a good commiefag.

>Consider the minimum amount of money needed to make the essential government functions work.
define necessary functions of a government, and I will show you how a rich individual can have better service for half the price.
>how is that not reasonable?
It is not reasonable to tax at such a high rate that it drives wealth out of your country. Because then there is nothing to tax.
How is this not common sense?

In America if a private entity can provide a basic function of society at a better quality and a better price than the government can, we let them.

In South America they must go through the bureaucratic loops to not be met with resistance for doing such. This is not a tax, this is a toll.

It’s actually because invesment here because they end up forced to collude with a corrupt government or get ‘rekt.
Wealth/income/estate taxes here are way lower than in the US. People are against a “fortune tax”, too.
Refer to . If it is related to financing basic government functions, how is theft having rich pay if everyone has to. I am against forced redistribution, I’d rather have taxpayers in general finance public works that benefit the population.
I know why and how cash can easily flow overseas because I work with that kind of consulting. However you cannot prevent and be afraid of any form of change just because you may upset some people.

> Modern societies thrive through specialization
> Oy vey

Because poor people would spend all of their money on weed and cellphones they can't afford to keep on so they would be broke again anyway just like after tax season.

It would actually be the other way around
You make the richest much poorer, barely make a dent in the finances of the much more numerous poor, then the rich decide to relocate with what thy have left and now suddenly nobody has a job and the country is starving. Reminds me a bit of OP’s meme flag

>However you cannot prevent and be afraid of any form of change just because you may upset some people.
You also can not force change that will upset a balance that already exist, or has already been disrupted in the past.
Never have I said I am against taxation, but in context of this thread and the opening Image, I am against unfairly taxing the wealthy.

Or to apply it to context, the rich shouldn't miss out on a tax break just because they are rich. That is how you get tax creep and eventually force them out of your country.

>It’s actually because invesment here because they end up forced to collude with a corrupt government or get ‘rekt.

This. Most business wants a fair, reliable space to do business in. Countries like Brazil can be scary unless you are a multinational conglomerate that has the weight to throw around to not worry about much anywhere.