• Jeena@piefed.jeena.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    133
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    So you’re saying if we kill the 8, we can double the wealth of almost half of the population of the world?

    • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      135
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yeah but think of the impact on society, any of us could be those top 8 if we just worked hard enough!

      /s

        • TexasDrunk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          5 months ago

          It won’t. The kind of people who would offer themselves up to be killed for the good of humanity aren’t the kind of people who make a billion dollars unless they hit the lottery a few times in a row.

          • DragonTypeWyvern
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            5 months ago

            I mean, they could just give away 90% of a billion dollars, leaving them with a pathetic 100 million dollars.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              5 months ago

              That’s what gets me when people defend billionaires. You could take 99 percent of that and they’d still have 10 million dollars which is still multiples of what the average worker makes in a lifetime. They could still live without a worry in the world.

        • Zink@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          I’ll sign this pact too.

          Once I’m into the top 1000 net worths on earth (practically a given to happen), I’ll just retire.

          If my valuable assets force me into the top 100 (more likely than not), I’ll hire somebody to find good charities to prop up.

          If I stumble into the top 10 billion/trillion-aires, go ahead and do what you gotta do and remind my widow to do nice things with the estate.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Shit if I ever end up in the top million let me know so I can solve that via charity and pro worker lobbying right quick.

    • zqwzzle@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yes then with their superior work ethic and bootstraps they could earn it back again. It’s like an infinite money glitch for humanity.

    • Tetsuo@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      5 months ago

      Since when does wealth be shared when someone dies ?

      No, the money will go to their descendants who will try to get even richer than their parents. A large part of that money will also be taken by the state because ?? and ??.

      Nothing would change.

      • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        A large part of that money will also be taken by the state because ?? and ??.

        to make society work, and IDK, give food stamps to the single mother? it’s literally the theme of the post.

        • Tetsuo@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          I want the same thing I just don’t think taking what is inherited is the way to do it.

          I would much rather see the ultra-rich pay properly their taxes when they are alive.

          It’s not like taking inheritance money is the only way to finance things. I don’t see the reasoning.

          I can totally understand why someone with huge revenue would pay more taxes but I don’t see why someone who inherits has to pay taxes at that exact moment.

          In any case, I think you are missing the point and answering the question “for what purpose?”. Instead of “why?”.

          I want to know why it’s more logical to pay taxes when you die rather than paying them in the first place when you got the revenue.

          Obviously, the money collected is useful I just don’t see why it has to be collected when it is a time of sorrow for a family.

          Also where I live it’s like 50% of the inheritance that is taxed. It is not just significant, it is 50% of the work of a life that goes in one shot to the state when someone dies.

          Edit: I was mistaken, I did some calculations and a practical example: If I inherited 200 000€ I would have to pay around 18 194€ (20%)for one taxation and some additional applies but it’s nowhere near what I was told. This rate goes from 5% to 45% for the largest inheritance. In reality, to get a 45% taxation in France I would have to inherit more than 1.5 million euros.

          I still think this taxation is too high and I regret that my comment is not clear. I don’t want less taxation overall I just think it makes more sense to take the money over time on the revenues. Anyway, taxation for inheritance is still something people here are very much concerned about. Parents want their children to inherit as much as possible of their wealth obviously so seeing a good chunk going to taxation is not great. Again I’m ok to pay taxes. But we have 192 different taxes here (that’s the exact number calculated in 2014) so I would prefer a system where most of the taxation comes from revenues and what you own and that’s it.

          • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 months ago

            I’m curious where you live? Because many places have laws like that. Almost NO WHERE do the ultra rich actually pay that. There’s always loop holes built in for them.

      • NABDad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        You’re just not killing enough people. At some point the heirs decide to give it all away.

      • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        5 months ago

        Your mistake is thinking that you are talking to people who think more than 2 feet in front of their noses.

      • sleen@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        5 months ago

        Shhh, some people want an imaginative excuse to kill others.

    • Oscar Cunningham@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      You would also have to double the debt of everyone in debt. Students might be quite annoyed, but not nearly as much as Alex Jones.

    • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yeah, then we would all have so much more money all of a sudden, that would mean we could all buy so much more stuff. That’s definitely how money works.