That’s such a small number. I bet there might be one or two near you even. You can just Google it!

    • Klox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Sure, but it’s also proven to be more cost effective to just manipulate people and shift their costs. Some moron was arguing against California’s billionaire wealth tax bill because billionaires might have “liquidity problems” lmfao.

    • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      And that goes for all of these fucking leeches: The beloved pop star. The legendary athlete. The really nice lady who gave away ten billion. The soft-spoken revered investment guru who cosplays as middle class.

      Every damn one of them should be paying 100% in taxes over a billion dollars, but they never will. Their greed is a more important consideration than whether or not you can get health care.

      • Mac@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 hours ago

        100% over a billion

        million
        fine, I’ll settle for 10 million

        • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          I’m fine letting people have 100m. It’s really a drop in the bucket compared to the folks who have 1,000 times more than them. Definitely down to tax everything past that.

        • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          9 hours ago

          No, a flat amount will never work. Make it a multiple of some figure, like average wage. That way it actually changes with inflation and we don’t have a situation where the the inflation adjusted minimum wage is 6 times the actual federal minimum wage.

          • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Make it so that if poor people earn more, the rich pay less taxes… Or something, that might actually not function.

            • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              8 hours ago

              Ya, that seems reasonable.

              I think it’s a pretty core democratic value that no person is worth more than another. A compromise of 1 million times should satisfy individuals with even the most acute case of wealth hoarding.

              • Mac@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                8 hours ago

                Yeah, I’m willing to comprise for a realistic solution to the billionaire problem.

    • foggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      I mean to be fair I’d spend a dollar to stop people from asking me to buy some shitcoin.

      But I also like, work, and pay taxes and shit.

      • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Paying money to prevent spam is different than paying money to avoid helping people and doing your share in society.