• saltesc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    217
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Bill Ackman, a billionaire hedge fund manager who has backed President Donald Trump in the past, on Thursday pledged to use his money to bankroll a challenger to Mamdani in the general election.

    Case in point.

    • MyRobotShitsBolts@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      77
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      And how did he get those billions? How many peoples necks did he have to step on to climb his way up. It’s not so much what you do with your billions, it’s how you got them that makes you evil. The only exception to this is probably Bezos ex wife, maybe.

      • bajabound@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        45
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        “Employees are the rungs on the ladder of success. Don’t hesitate to step on them.” -Rule of acquisition #211

      • NoForwardslashS@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        35
        ·
        8 months ago

        She was working for a hedge fund when she met him and they were married for 26 years. She may have given away $19 billion of her fortune, but her net worth is still $36 billion, the same as the original divorce settlement.

    • mienshao@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      This might induce me to donate to Mamdani’s campaign. I live in fucking Illinois btw.

    • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Honestly, even if you think billionaires should exist, it’s still the most logical action for Mamdani to oppose them as billionaires will do everything to stop him.

  • Fandangalo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    102
    ·
    8 months ago

    Imagine life was a game. You lived for 2025 years. You worked 260 days / year. You made the median US salary.

    You would need to relive that process 3,145 times to match an Oligarch.

    That amount of wealth is unethical while humanity suffers. No one can really fathom “1b dollars.”

  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    82
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Mamdani added in his response: “I have already had to start to get used to, get used to the fact that the president will talk about how I look, how I sound, where I’m from, who I am, ultimately, because he wants to distract from what I’m fighting for, and I’m fighting for the very working people that he ran a campaign to empower, that he has since then betrayed.”

    Goddamn, this reads like a response that came from a real socialist playbook. Don’t take the bait on the culture war bullshit, say it’s distraction from helping workers. Wow.

  • Suavevillain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    78
    ·
    8 months ago

    This needs to become the mainstream opinion. Billionaires and ultra wealthy shouldn’t exist. There is no trickling down or any of that stolen wealth coming back into the hands of average people.

    • raptore39@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      avesta
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Imagine if billionaires paid their fair share of taxes. Municipalities would fight to get them to live in their area

    • x0x7@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      8 months ago

      They will just live in other countries if being a billionaire is illegal.

      • MiDaBa@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        8 months ago

        It doesn’t matter where they live. If the US exerts pressure on whatever country the money is in they can and would get that money back. They’re somehow able to freeze the accounts of Russian oligarchs so they’s no reason to believe they couldn’t do it with Bezo as well.

      • Don_alForno@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        8 months ago

        That’s the neat thing, they won’t. It’s pretty easy to apply a high tax on moving away. In fact the USA of all places do just that.

        Also, what do rich people possess? Assets. Physical assets. A big part of that is real estate, owned privately or by companies they own. There’s no taking that with you. They can sell their assets and try to take the money with them, but that means the society they leave gets it’s assets back.

      • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        8 months ago

        That’s fine, billionaires do not add to an economy, they drain it. So if they leave it will remove a useless burden on the economy and whatever country is dumb enough to take them in can deal with them instead. Meanwhile, if they are pulling money from our country we can find ways to tax it and prevent them from draining our resources (and yes, money is a resource like any other).

      • EldenLord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        8 months ago

        Lol, no. This is a strawman argument. Billionaires will absolutely not give up their precious connections and real estate to live on a private island or move away. Even if 50% would do that (lmao never) the tax would still be a huge benefit. Even without the money, not having these greedsacks meddling with local politics and laws would be a dream.

      • in4apenny@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 months ago

        Hopefully the corrupt ones go to China or Vietnam because they’re not afraid to give corrupt billionaires the death penalty.

    • Captain Howdy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Can’t they just get around a tax like that by borrowing cash (for their lifestyle) and using their assets as collateral?

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Wealth includes assets. If you can borrow against it, it can be taxed.

        In fact, taxing the assets makes borrowing against them even more expensive.

      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I’m actually against a wealth tax, but think one of the only ways that taking their unrealized assets can work is if we do as you suggest.

        If you own stock in something, taxing unrealized gains isn’t good. it’s not like were going to pay them for unrealized losses.

        But we MUST stop them from being able to actualize those unrealized gains without taxing them like when they use their unrealized assets as collateral. It’s like a loophole for the ultra wealthy where they can just borrow against their assets for their entire life without paying taxes on it.

        And really… who cares if this way might be more expensive to do, they’re rich as fuck, and can pay for it as part of that tax. Also assets can be very nebulous and hard to know what they actually have. But when you see that new house, new yacht, donation to a SPAC or whatever, the IRS can come knocking and be like how’d you pay for that.

    • x0x7@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      8 months ago

      It will lead to more dark money. It’s very hard to accurately measure a persons net worth when their financials aren’t just a house and an IRA like the average person. Especially if they don’t want you to see it. You’ll never be able to implement that tax in a consistent way.

      • in4apenny@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        8 months ago

        Yes, that’s the current situation, thanks for pointing that out. I don’t think people understand how much tax evasion they do, for instance as of 2016 there was £36 TRILLION in offshore tax havens, UK GDP is £25 trillion for comparison. Murder in the first degree can get you prison for life, but letting countless people die from poverty related issues at home while getting rich off of starving and killing kids overseas makes you a billionaire. Why do we accept that?

        • selfdefense420@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          8 months ago

          law is inherently flawed and easily manipulated by clever sociopaths. chaotic good FTW. let there be guillotines and morally sound citizens and nothing more.

          • in4apenny@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            Laws are written to be manipulated, that’s why European culture uses laws and words as weapons, for European culture loves words to be twisted. This is why the “truth” always changes in the European mind, look no further than their use of “treaties” or “truces” or their fad-politics. Whether it’s far-right capitalism or left-wing socialism, I fail to see the difference when they both rely on “production at all costs” at the expense of our natural world and turning our habitable environments into gravel pits and uranium mines all in the name of “productivity.” The global south, or “third world”, and natural peoples will all be capitalist workerbees or socialist proletarian under the European death-cult of “productivity” as they call it; I call it a culture of suicide with a medieval religious devotion to their faith except now it’s shifted to science, technology, and money - just another example of how the truth always changes. They’re incapable of any real thought, incapable of simply appreciating the magic of nature to admire a lake or mountain or people in being, and most of all they cannot listen unless the world around them is despiritualized into mechanical models and dead symbols written on dead leaves.

            To me I don’t see the shift towards left-wing, even the death of capitalism, to be revolutionary. It may be yet another revolution for the European mind, but to the rest of the world it’s merely a continuation. In order for humanity to live in harmony with nature, European culture must die.

      • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        8 months ago

        Thing is, that ability to evade that is intentionally built in. It has to be. We have KYC laws here and anything over 10K is tracked.

        The fact that the ultrawealthy are able to manipulate money in ways so that it’s not tracked and/or not taxed has to be by design.

      • Don_alForno@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        Huh, curious, I could swear we Germans (and most other countries I’m sure) used to do just that until a glorious neoliberal government came along and abolished the tax.

      • hexonxonx@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        That’s why accountants and auditors exist.

        If you’re suggesting that it shouldn’t be done because its too hard – it’s not. That’s just a dumb excuse.

    • Derpenheim@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      You know what? I don’t want it peaceful. They’ve stomped on people there entire lives, forced others to rely on social programs, dig through trash, and work to the bone.

      I want a comeuppance, I want blood, and I want it to be that of every fucking billionaires’ head rolling off the guillotine

      • matlag@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        8 months ago

        And you’ll have it. They have enough money to pay an army and you bet they will use that to stop you from taking their wealth. Understand that they have rationalized their immense wealth to the point where they trully believe they deserve it. You can see it sometimes in how they consider themselves hard working geniuses, or decide God somewhat chose them to be ridiculously rich.

        Yes, they will resort to violence (but not themselves, of course). But they won’t need to get their hands too dirty.

        They’ll fund campaigns, they’ll own law enforcements and will wield it against the people, meanwhile they’ll buy propaganda to convince as many people as they can it’s all for the best. That’s easy to predict because they already do exactly that.

        Violent repression of demonstrations, violence and intimidation against activists and journalists. Owning of all the mainstream medias and a large share of the less mainstream ones. All of that is slowly normalized.

      • Cherry@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        Agree. They had a choice. They shunned taxes and played at fake philanthropy. They have now dropped that and started playing like they are god. They are fragile mortals that need a reminder of revolution, I would like to see it done the French way but any way should do.

      • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        You have to ask yourself: Is fulfilling that desire for retribution worth the lives of the millions of vulnerable people who would be killed due to lack of medical treatment, potable water, food, etc?

        • Derpenheim@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          ???

          You mean the ones who are already sick and dying from those exact things, caused by the greed of the aforementioned?

    • OddMinus1@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      8 months ago

      But could this really be done? As far as I’ve understood, billionaires typically don’t have a billion liquidized and ready for spending. Rather, their value is distributed in ownership of several companies. How would the 100% taxes on ownership in companies be applied?

      Don’t get me wrong, I would love to see it work, but I feel like it’s a lot more complicated than stated. And if a good way of applying those taxes would be introduced, I’m sure the billionaires would either find new ways to make the money untouchable or personally move to a country with looser tax laws.

      • ctrl_alt_esc@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        8 months ago

        That’s what conservatives always claim. Most of them won’t move and even if they do, good riddance. Simply tax their wealth beforehand.

        • OddMinus1@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          My experience is from Norway where the taxes on the rich is balancing on a line. A lot of rich Norwegians have already moved to Switzerland to avoid annual taxes on their wealth. I would expect to see something similar if USA introduced reasonable taxes, unfortunately.

    • huppakee@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      8 months ago

      Voila, no more billionaires

      … in the country with the tax. They’ll just live somewhere else.

      • Synapse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        People have to stop believing that wealthy people will leave instantly once they begin getting taxed. This is just a lie.

        They are wealthy because of their assets and connections. They have houses, appartements, offices and factories. They have a network of influencer in the country they live in, in the city they live in ! They have a big family, kids. It’s actually harder for these people to move out than you and I.

        The money is already escaping. They use any loopholes (fiscal optimization they call it) to pay much lower tax than anyone else proportionally.

        They won’t leave ! Let the tax begin ! The loopholes have to be eliminated so that they cannot convert their wealth to escape tax artificially.

        • huppakee@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          I’m getting downvoted like i i care they’d leave, just that it’s not gonna bring tax revenue.

          • reddit_sux@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            They are not doing it even today. If they are businessmen, they are not going to leave their businesses just because they are being taxed.

  • HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    8 months ago

    Even the billionaires would be better off without billinaires. It their relative ranking was the same they would still have more money than they could spend but it would now come with clean air, water, land, better infrastructure, a healthier world, happier people to interact with.

    • plyth@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      What do the billionaires buy that pollutes nature that much?

      The pollution comes from millions of cars, chemicals for products like clothing and intense agriculture so that everybody can eat some form of meat.

      Billionaires allow us to feel helpless while we could agree with our neighbors to reduce the ecological footprint of society to a minimum.

      • brendansimms@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        The pollution comes from millions of cars, an industry forced on the people through decades of lobbying and bribery to eliminate the possibility of free public transportation, so that they could become richer. The pollution comes from products for clothing that are made cheaply as possible - at the cost of the environment - and extreme amounts of ad campaigns that purposefully change contemporary fashion ideals in order to keep fast turnaround on product and maximize profit so that they can become richer. Agriculture is corrupted by the rich so that it gets government subsidies in addition to maximizing profits by basing crop choice on profitability instead of sustainability, disregarding native species and planting unfathomably large fields of monocultures, squeezing the farmers themselves and funneling all the money to agri-business execs, i.e. they can become richer. Then they run ad campaigns saying ‘everyone needs to do their part to save the environment!’ which is clearly bullshit when the system itself is made to maximize profit, and not to maximize caring for the earth. Polluting the earth is profitable, and the profits flow ever upward.

      • HubertManne@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        Im not saying that. Its the wealth inequality that stunts society. People don’t have the resources to make decisions based on whats best and have to deal with what they can afford. Lack of infrastructure and regulators results in more pollution.

        • plyth@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          People don’t have the resources to make decisions based on whats best

          People have still more than many others on the world. Illegal immigrants have less, and they have to pay off their traffickers.

          This mindset is a prison. The people have the power, they are just sure that they don’t have it. A beautiful display of mind control.

          • HubertManne@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            I would argue the trap is in the other way. Your reply reminds me a lot of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6vjaimSK4E . You may think you know how good the average american has it but you may not understand stand the unique challenges of various americans in many different situations. Wealth disparity is the trap and the only way toward freedom is a society were it is not so extreme.

            • plyth@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              and the only way toward freedom is a society were it is not so extreme.

              That is not a way. Who should create the society?

              OP argued that there are no resources left. Well, then that’s the way till the robots make humans unnecessary.

              If people want to get out, they have to do something. Don’t work harder, consume smarter. Not the poorest have to start but those who make two vacations per year. Spend that money wisely and grow from there.

              Thanks for the song.

              • HubertManne@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                8 months ago

                we should create such a society with taxation and regularion. resources are finite but we have them left and I agree we have to use them wisely. I often point out that we would get in excess of a barrels worth of oil for every one spent in the heyday of the oil age but now we just get a few but wind/solar/etc lets us recoup way more energy per barrel again.

                • plyth@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  we should create such a society

                  The problem is that nobody knows how.

  • huppakee@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’m not against people having money, but to have a thousand times more than most people can make in their entire lifetime is just taking it too far. There should be a cap after which you pay 90% tax or something

    • JoeyHarrington@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      52
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Check the progressive taxation we had in the US after WW2 when, barring the racism/sexism/otherisms, the US actually thrived and single income families could manage being middle class, and owning a nice home. Reagan fucked us, but if it hadn’t been him it would have been another terrible regressive.

      All these conservative lapdogs continue to fuck us all with their single issue voting and sticking it to the libs.

      I’m pretty judgy right now so imo anybody voting for GOP candidates in the US is either gullible, brainwashed, semi/fully mentally deficient, or is so racist or scared of other people’s peepees that they will vote against their own best interests.

    • Lung@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Problem is billionaires don’t make “income” and it’s quite difficult to even know what they own, let alone how to tax something like unrealized gains on stock holdings that they are using as leverage to get loans

      • LOGIC💣@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        At some point, somebody convinced people that unrealized gains were not actually income because you don’t know for sure that you’d make that money, and I think that was a bad idea. Maybe unrealized gains aren’t 1:1 the same thing as income, but the calculations of an income equivalent aren’t going to be complicated.

          • Supervisor194@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            This exactly. At some threshold of worth, you should get taxed an amount based on your worth that will be big enough to force you to realize some gains in order to pay it.

            • bus_factor@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              The issue with realizing the gains is that you have to relinquish control of your company bit by bit. However, you could have the company (which you likely control) give out dividends, or you could use the stock as collateral for a loan. Or just pay yourself a bigger salary.

              • moriquende@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                8 months ago

                This is a good question: is it okay for you as a person to control a company that has grown that large? Maybe nudging people to give up control of entities that large is a good side effect.

                • bus_factor@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Give up control to whom? Some megacorp with infinite money would just buy a majority stake (often referred to as a hostile takeover) and wind up owning everything to an even larger extent than today.

          • chingadera@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Try being rich you fucking idiot

            It’s a joke y’all, damn. Just pull up on your boots or whatever it is these rich people did to turn on the money

      • acargitz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        8 months ago

        If only there was an entire federal agency whose sole job would be to track them down and tax them.

        • moriquende@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          You can have a person be full-time managing the billionaire’s case, still a very strong net win.

          And even if hypothetically the cost of tracking their wealth outpaced the income generated by the tax, it’s still a societal positive by reducing inequality, which is the root of most problems.

      • ohwhatfollyisman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        you don’t tax the income. you tax luxury expenditure.

        if they commission a yacht, they pay 200% tax on that. if they charter a jet, they pay 500% tax on that spend. if they retain a jet, they pay 800% tax on all its expenses from hangar parking to servicing to everything else.

        the tax on any car above a guideline value should increase 1% for every 1% increase in value of the car. say, you pay 1% tax for a 1000 dollar car, 50% for a 1500 dollar car, 100% for a 2000 dollar car, 300% for a 4000 dollar car and so on. and not just on the sticker price, but on every service attached to that vehicle (insurance, maintenance, etc.) for its life.

        similarly for luxury hotels, clothing, jewellery, watches, golf and ski resorts, and marriages in venice.

        • alaphic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Yeah, cuz people obviously don’t store wealth in bank accounts or investment properties and/or shell corporations… That’s why the Caymans are famous for their shellfish and local hospitality, and Bezos’ ex-wife didn’t end up getting much cash in their divorce.

          It’s also fortunate that these idiots haven’t figured out that they could probably have a (few) companies that hold things (excuse my rough terminology for this concept I just now came up with) maybe even purchase them too - like jets, cars, maybe yachts even - and not have to pay any of those taxes!

          Man, i hope word doesn’t get out about this!

      • witten@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        My favorite tax policy hack for that last part is for the government to require a billionaire to formally declare the value of each of their assets (for purposes of calculating taxes)… with the stipulation that the government can choose to buy such an asset from the billionaire at the declared value at any time.

        Gets to market rate real quick.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      I’m not against people having money

      It’s been an archaic and backwards system for managing collective wealth for over a century.

      We’re living in an era of unprecedented surpluses. But we’re still gatekeeping the most rudimentary essentials of daily life behind a paywall.

      I am absolutely against people having money. All money causes is grief, anxiety, and depravation.

    • xep@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Why not just have a cap? 90% still means that they can further accumulate wealth, and taxes means they will try to dodge them.

      • Serinus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        They used to dodge 90% taxes by reinvesting in their workers and their company’s reputation. That way the company would last a hundred years and continue to pay out your family for generations, and all you’ve gotta do is hire people to keep it running.

    • chingadera@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Fuck that, 99.99% and they’d still have more than we could earn in a lifetime, fuck that and fuck them.