Like just kill them off?

It is a completely unnecessary amount of wealth.

I’m not sure I’m on board with preventing people from becoming billionaires though.

I think a progressive tax structure (including progressive wealth taxes) that makes becoming/maintaining a net wealth of billions of dollars very difficult is the appropriate solution. This forces competition, reinvestment in the American people’s skills, opportunities, and welfare. It’s about trying to foster equality of opportunity and innovation. When wealth is allowed to accumulate to the levels we’re seeing, people become powerful enough to buy elections, monopolize the markets, even take us to war. That’s not democracy, and it’s not American.

Absurd idea to ban billionaires. Utterly stupid. You may as well decide that a world of mediocrity is all we strive for.

What’s the incentive to think or work hard, if you can’t enjoy the fruits of your labor?

This is a horribly stupid idea, and antithetical to American ideals.

@Vignette: “Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, the U.K.’s opposition Labour party and others apparently think the world would be better off without billionaires.”

Correction: Warren is completely ok with billionaires existing.

@Vignette: “Do we need to get rid of Billionaires?”

There is no moral justification for the existence of billionaires.

@elbanditoroso “What’s the incentive to think or work hard, if you can’t enjoy the fruits of your labor?”

Are you saying that hundreds of millions of dollars isn’t enough wealth to incentivize people?

@gorillapaws I’m saying that putting limits on it is bad policy.

I personally think that Gates, Bezos, Benioff, and others don’t have any great need for their billions. But making it public policy – taking their money away from them – is a horrible idea.

@elbanditoroso I think the premise is faulty. I don’t see anyone planning to ban billionaires. That is fear mongering. But taxing assets over 50 billion or 25 billion at a higher rate to reduce income inequality seems justified to me.

I don’t want them dead. I want people to pay their employees enough to live comfortably. When WalMart cost tax payers money since they won’t pay enough to not need food stamps I get fucking irate. They are swimming in cash and should pay people a solid wage.

Make a billion dollars, I don’t care. PAY YOUR FUCKING EMPLOYEES!!

@janbb the OP wrote “get rid of” which suggests that they cease to exist.

If the OP wants to ask a better question, fine.

@elbanditoroso You’re right. I think the question is misleading.

@janbb So, are you saying a sort of luxury tax on property? Like we do on cars? I’ve heard some states charge a luxury tax on real estate, I don’t know if that’s actually happening, or it was just an idea. I would assume that’s all at the state or county level.

Where does it end?

Let’s say that Bernie Sanders decides “no one needs a billion dollars” and confiscates all the extra money. (by passing laws, of course, which will never happen)

Then Elizabeth Warren decides that a billion is too much, so she pushes for $500 million.

And so on and so forth.

It seems like placing limits and vilifying people people who exceed them is nothing more than a race to the extreme bottom.

@johnpowell how do your force a business owner to pay his or her employees more money? Are you suggesting government controls of all business salaries?

I can’t tell if you are serious. Have you never eared minimum wage? The federal mandated minimum wage. This thing we have done for 100 years.

No.One need only look at collectivism wherever it’s tried.

@johnpowell yes, in my youth, I earned minimum wage, which (at the time) was something like $4.00/hour.

But my point is the same. If the government can set minimum wages, and (according to @Vignette maximum wages), then why can’t they decide to set all wages in between?

That’s what the Soviet Union did.

One point. When the government starts heading down the road of taking wealth and property, wealthy people start to move their money out of the country, and sometimes even leave the country. It doesn’t work exactly as you would think. The ultra-wealthy have all sorts of things available to them that is average folk don’t consider. We do need to be careful not to idealize these ideas. There are negatives and backlashes to some of what is being discussed.

It’s better to keep the money here in the US. We need to be sure we are reasonable. Extremes get extremes.

Having said that, just having $10million in the bank at 2% interest gets you $200,000 a year income. Most of us can easily and happily live on that. Money gets money. Add a zero you get $2million in income. $2 million doing nothing. One zero is $100 million in savings. Can you imagine? I think most of us can’t.

Spreading the wealth I think is a good idea, but we need to be really careful how we do it. I’d rather do it through higher pay for lower levels and more moderate pay for the highest levels, rather than a huge tax on income or spending. Although, I am in favor of progressive income taxes, and a higher capital gains tax.

@elbanditoroso -“What’s the incentive to think or work hard, if you can’t enjoy the fruits of your labor?” Exactly.

Remember that in 2015 Bernie Sanders wanted to tax 100% of earnings over $1 million

article from Bloomberg News

Well, Bernie Sanders looks like he’s a billion years old.
Besides, what would Eartha Kitt sing about? Oh no, she’s dead!!

When Warren Buffet’s secretary pays more in taxes than Warren Buffet does, then there’s something wrong. Let people still benefit from their labor, their contacts, their hedging, but make them pay more taxes, and less tax loopholes for the wealthy.

I agree that the wealth divide is a problem. I don’t know the best way to fix it though because just about every solution proposed makes me cringe.

No because they get tax right offs by giving generously to charities which in turn feed,clothe and house many more that could not have the funds themselves.

No, I don’t have a problem with the existence of the super-rich. I do have a problem with them exploiting loopholes and paying less in taxes than they should. We all know that occurs. And we know corporations don’t always pay fair wages, but I’d suspect that decision isn’t solely on the billionaire at the top.

No not ban billionaires ,but by god make them pay their share of taxes not give them loop hole after loop hole to not pay their share of taxes.

I don’t believe in discrimination of any sort!!! EVERY breathing being serves a useful purpose!!! I can remember when people didn’t like millionaires. Now days, IF you don’t have a billion, you’re considered middle class!!!

@chyna Judging by the vapid nature of the calls to rob the billionaires of their riches, I would not rule out their desire to take their lives AND their money.

If we switch this slightly away from those poor suffering billionaires to corporations, does it seem fair that Amazon paid no tax at all for 2018 despite being subject to a 21% tax rate?

Instead of getting rid of billionaires you just have to get rid of all tax loop holes for anyone over a certain income.

Interesting answer @gorillapaws. But I will contest your answer in that nothing could be more Un-American than excessive taxation. Our Nation was born on citizens of the old world rebelling against excessive oppressive taxation. Thankfully why we have not and will not implement this kind of short sighted taxation. It’s failed every time it’s been tried. I would love to see a more practical conversation in how we can wean the Government off of this blank check unabated wasteful spending habits. The uber rich are the ones who funded and continue to fund this amazing land of opportunity and the jobs they provide…why would anyone in their right mind want to fuck this up?

Are we passing judgement against people for having lots?
What WILL we tell Oprah?

Personally I think inherited billions is obscene.
People who have built a company deserve some serious value for that I think.

So many straw men dressed up as Bernie Sanders, oh my!

@Vignette “Our Nation was born on citizens of the old world rebelling against excessive oppressive taxation.”

Our nation was born on a rejection of taxation without representation—it wasn’t the small (relative to modern day taxes) tax on tea, sugar, stamps, etc. It was a repudiation of the Intolerable Acts a rejection of monarchy, and of dynastic wealth. It was a rejection of colonialism, imperialism and an affirmation of self-determination for the people to engage in self-rule and democracy.

@Vignette “Thankfully why we have not and will not implement this kind of short sighted taxation. It’s failed every time it’s been tried.”

It was very successful in the USA (of all places). Our country’s infrastructure, investments in the baby boomer generation’s educations were all paid for by taxes. During the mid 20th century, the top marginal tax rate fluctuated in the 70%-90% range.

God was it horrible. It was like Venezuela, only worse. All of the billionaire job creators fled and nobody else wanted to work. People were eating rats in the street. Children were selling their organs to buy food. The country fell in to despair and ruin.

Oh, wait, that didn’t actually happen. That was when the US emerged as a global superpower, invested in it’s people, won the space race, built highways, bridges, dams, buildings. It’s the period of time that laid the groundwork for the success of today’s boomer generation.

Many public colleges in the US were tuition free back then believe it or not. For example in 1956 UC Berkeley was tuition free for California residents, although you did have to pony up an annual “incidental fee” of $84.

@Vignette “The uber rich are the ones who funded and continue to fund this amazing land of opportunity”

The “Uber rich” got that way by utilizing all of the resources of this country (or inheriting that wealth from people who did), often by exploiting workers, the political process, and externalizing the costs of their pollution onto society. Many billionaires aren’t terrible people, they’ve just exploited and capitalized on the investments made by the taxpayer more effectively than others. I assure you though that they’ve received far more than they’ve given to the taxpayer.

How many billionaires are from tech companies? The US government invented the internet using tax dollars. The taxpayer invests billions in having a well-educated workforce for billionaires to hire. Notice how you don’t see a lot of tech startups in Somalia (despite the 0% tax rate and no government regulations)?

Who benefits more from having a taxpayer-funded robust air traffic network: Joe Taxpayer who makes somewhere between 0 and maybe a dozen flights per year? or someone like Jeff Bezos whose business is built on transporting millions of tons of products across the country? Who benefits from having a robust judicial system more? The taxpayer who might see justice done if they were wronged, or companies distributing billions of dollars of products annually without the fear of piracy? Who benefits from having patent/trademark and copyright agencies? Who benefits from having robust ports? Joe taxpayer who imports outsourced products? or the billionaires who ship raw materials abroad to be manufactured into finished products in 3rd world sweatshops and re-imported to the US? How many jobs did Bain Capital create when they buy distressed companies, lay everyone off and sell the resources for a profit? Who benefits from our war on terror? The taxpayer has spent trillions, much of which has gone to the private defense sector. Or the Pharma industry that wants to use taxpayer funded research to develop drugs and then privatize the profits while extorting the sick…

You appear to have bought in to this American Dream fiction that’s been sold to voters by the investment class. They’re laughing at you and everyone else who thinks that they can become a billionaire too if the just work hard enough, while voting against their interests. The “American Dream” is actually much easier to attain in Scandanavian countries with all of those “oppressive” tax rates. That’s because they use that tax revenue to invest in their citizens. It’s a better bet than hoping the billionaires do the right thing with their money.

The problem with “taxing the rich” is that the new taxes often end up being paid by the middle class. Roughly half my income is erased in taxation one way or another. If we tax the rich you have to find a way to tax what they already own or have socked away. You can have a progressive income tax sure but that’s not going to really do much in the end. Taxing investments hits middle class investors especially hard. Having a 401k and a faint hope of retiring is one of the last things keeping all of us who are not multi-millionaires from being wage slaves or retiring to a diet of dog food on S.S. When the left speak “taxing the rich” the right hear “more taxes for me” not because the people on the right are rich but because by the time it is all said and done they believe they will end up paying more.

@ARE_you_kidding_me “If we tax the rich you have to find a way to tax what they already own or have socked away.”

Bernie’s wealth tax should make you happy then. If you’re a couple with a combined net worth less than $32 million, then you pay nothing. If you’re a couple with a net worth of $32,000,100 then your total wealth tax under Bernie’s plan would literally be $1 (just 1% of every dollar beyond the cutoff). It ratchets up though to 8% on wealth above $10 Billion.

This means that it’s hard to create multi-generational dynasties. Jeff Bezos’ great-great-great-great-great grandkid can’t just sit on his ass all day and live off of the interest from the family fortune as it continues to compound in the markets. I’m ok with that. Anointing the slothful children of the elite is not the American Dream. That’s Neo-Aristocracy, the very thing the founding fathers fought against in the revolutionary war. We reject birthright entitlement, and instead encourage equality of opportunity. I would much rather have fewer billionaires and have thousands more hectomillionaires/decamillionaires, and I’d be even happier still with tens of thousands more multi-millionaires in the economy.

^^I believe Bernie is all talk and like Trump he is just telling people what they want to hear. I do not see a snowballs chance in hell of this happening and I believe Bernie knows it too. This is just one reason I don’t trust Sanders.

@ARE_you_kidding_me So you agree with the plan, but don’t think it’s realistic? As for the snowball’s chance in hell, I recall a great many pro Hillary Democrats telling me the same thing about how Hillary could never lose to Trump.

I think Bernie is sincere in his policies and he has every intention of fighting to get his plans put into law. I think it’s possible. Half of this country doesn’t bother to vote. If Bernie inspires the working class to turn out to the polls like they haven’t in at least a generation, you could see him not only take the white house, but also push in Democrats at all levels of state/federal government. With that kind of popularity behind him, it would be difficult for moderate Democrats to stand with their billionaire donors against their party and their constituents.

A milquetoast moderate Democrat who recites rehersed vapid platitudes isn’t going to drive that kind of turnout though.

I’m not someone to agree with such a plan. Would such a tax apply to existing wealth? If so that’s a retroactive tax and I could not be more opposed. If lawmakers passed such a plan I can see wealth being hidden under loophole after loophole. If I was about to bust that number I would simply take my wealth and leave. This is a pipe dream, it is ear candy for left wing voters and it is disaterous policy.
Bernie has a long history of talk like this but he has never proven to be anything other than an average politician.

@ARE_you_kidding_me ” Would such a tax apply to existing wealth? If so that’s a retroactive tax and I could not be more opposed.”

Yes it would.

I think the justification is reasonable: Billionaire, you and your buddies promised trickle down would help the average American. We deregulated and slashed your marginal tax rates by 60% and now we’re seeing the worst wealth inequality in history. The working class taxpayer wants a refund for services paid for but not delivered. The wealth never trickled down. It was all a lie.

So you support every single American with a net worth over that threshold leaving overnight?
You also support retroactive taxation?

@ARE_you_kidding_me Under Bernie’s plan there is a 40% exit tax for people who leave. Furthermore, I can assure you that many of these people aren’t mystical beings with unique powers. Many are simply ruthless enough to do utterly evil shit and take money from it (guys like Martin Shkreli), many inherited their wealth (like Trump). Very few are so uniquely talented that they couldn’t be replaced in an instant with someone equally or more talented.

There’s this mythology surrounding the American Dream. The reality is that only 35% of the Forbes top 400 richest Americans started out as lower or middle class. Two-thirds came from wealth.

@gorillapaws Nobody in their right mind is going to hang around to wait for it to be signed into law or at least be here when it takes effect. The second it’s a real possibility they’re out.
I agree that Martin Shkreli is one of the biggest shitbags to ever walk the earth but I do not believe that just because someone inherited or made a great deal of wealth that they are instantly malevolent. Sure some will just sit on their wealth and not contribute but others will and do so in profound ways. What if people like Elon Musk were not allowed to keep their wealth. This single person has shown the world that electric cars are not only viable but sexy as well. He may actually get us back into the business of space exploration.
I do not believe that we have the right to simply seize these fortunes like Bernie is suggesting. I don’t actually think it is possible either, the man can sure talk though.

@ARE_you_kidding_me “I do not believe that just because someone inherited or made a great deal of wealth that they are instantly malevolent.”

Neither do I. Where did I say that? My point is that if all of the heirs and heiresses left, it wouldn’t really have a negative impact the country. Musk is one of the few billionaires that would not be easily replaced. The thing is that guys like him are capable of generating more wealth. They can’t do that in Somalia. Nobody is saying we take 100% of Musk’s wealth, either. We’re advocating for a progressive tax on his net wealth in the single digits at the highest levels.

@gorillapaws Most countries that have had “wealth taxes” have abolished them because the wealthy left and they took their money with them. They will not be going to Somalia, They’ll go to Europe, New Zealand, South America or even Canada. They don’t need to stay in the USA. If they don’t do these things here more than likely the benefits won’t stay here either.

^^So leave the poor hard done by rich folk alone, and continue to let the average working slob pay all the countries bills?
The wealthy already source their manufacturing over seas, what is really at stake to just tax the wealthy their fare share?
Other than the fact time after time those sleaze bags always find a way to pass those tax burdens onto the working joe.

@SQUEEKY2 Because you’re not going to be able to do it, not like how it it being described. Targeting them is not the solution. You enact legislation that protects the average working slob from being exploited by business and gov’t We reform healthcare in a way that reduces the obscene cost rather than just finding away to “pay for it.” We pass laws that prohibit companies from hiring shifts of part-time workers to get out of paying benefits, we don’t tax staples like groceries at all, anywhere down the line so they stay affordable, etc, etc… What is at stake is a flood of money and resources leaving this economy. Even if it’s just sitting in investments it’s still doing something We already let this concentration happen, that’s done. I also don’t think that most rich people are scumbags either. Out of touch, perhaps but they are not the problem. I’ll go as far to say that this intrinsic hate for wealthy people is a is a sign of poor mental health. It’s as if people believe there is this ephemeral boogeyman conspiring to screw over anyone with less money than them.

How about this 2% tax on everyone up to $50K income, and 45% for everyone over $50K no loop holes no tax deductions nothing.
It would simplify the tax system drastically.

@SQUEEKY2 We are there now, except that below 50K are already paying almost 50% too.

But the wealthy have many loop holes they can use to pay less and less, I am saying take all loop holes away.

Um, ok. How would you suggest doing that.