• WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        19 hours ago

        I would prefer a mixed system. All wealth over 1000x the median household income taxed at 100%. So no one should have a fortune larger than that, a number that would be approximately $80 million today. But if you secretly gather a fortune much larger than that? If you somehow secretly amass a fortune 10,000x the median household income? At that point I would apply severe criminal penalties, like a mandatory minimum 20 year sentence. I don’t want to throw the book at someone just because they accidentally let their fortune grow a bit beyond the limit. But if you’re a whole order of magnitude above it? Then that’s when severe criminal penalties should apply. At some point your wealth becomes so large that you personally become a threat to national security. Amassing a fortune in the billions should be treated like a private citizen trying to build their own nuclear bomb. No one should have that much power, and we should treat both the same.

      • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        19 hours ago

        I like the 1000x threshold because that is approximately the maximum possible fortune one can amass in one’s lifetime off of ordinary salary work and extreme frugality.

        1000x the median income would be about $80 million. Consider the highest-earning non-executive salaried employees - people who spend years in school in very challenging fields. People like neurosurgeons. Imagine if there was a couple composed of two neurosurgeons, and they earn very good salaries. They’re also so frugal that they spend basically nothing. You have a pair of neurosurgeons literally sleeping on the sidewalk out front of the hospital. They live like that, and they invest and save every penny they can. The highest salaried incomes combined with pathological frugality.

        Even if they did all of that. Even if two highly educated workers lived off nothing and saved everything, even then those people would still struggle to earn, over their whole life, a fortune that exceeded 1000x the median household income.

        Such a system allows for a capitalism that actually does live up to the marketing. You’re allowed to earn a fortune as large as your own labor and skills will allow. However, the only way to obtain a fortune larger than this is to get into the business of labor arbitrage - hiring other people and harnessing the surplus of their labor. I want people to be able to earn as much money from the sweat of their own brow as they can. But I don’t want people to be able to hoard strategically dangerous fortunes by exploiting the labor of others. And 1000x the median household income is a nice even number that’s easy to explain to people and that achieves this goal.

  • Formfiller@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Private financing of political campaigns, lobbying, billionaire tax evasion, corporate personhood, corporate tax evasion, wealth over 100 million, private equity in housing or healthcare, employment dependent health insurance, misinformation presented as news, not enforcing laws on the wealthy, corporate subsidies, big farm subsidies(small community farms only), gerrymandering, for profit prisons and felons running for office.

    • rekabis@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      24 hours ago

      All you have to do is make it illegal to expose or proselytize religion to anyone under 22, and religion would likely die out within 2-3 generations.

      When you have been raised as a rationalist and know, at a fundamental level, the bullshit detection system called the Scientific Method, you need to have some pretty powerful mental illness in play to willingly grasp at religion.

    • folaht@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      And how will Californians and New Yorkers be able to afford a new home next year?

  • m-p{3}@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 days ago

    Leaving a shopping cart in a parking space instead of bringing it back to the cart shelter.

  • Oikio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Production of cigarettes and tobacco.

    As ex smoker who tried to quit so many times during almost two decades - I know how tough this drug can be and that it’s wide acceptance as social norm makes it so much worse.

  • chunes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Being cruel to other people by hiding behind some power imbalance.

    I don’t want to live in a society where the consequence for this behavior is a meaningless fine.