Post

it’s true that a functional welfare state requires more of a contribution from society at large than just soaking the rich can provide, but that’s besides the point soaking the rich is a goal unto itself

it is quite literally a global security issue, as the very rich are in some cases more powerful than entire governments

Blair MacDonald@blairmacdonald.bsky.social

You can go after them on so many fronts that can even appeal to right wingers like national security; remember when Elon shut down Starlink for Ukraine because he had a call with Putin?

61 reposts634 likes

It valuable, though, to distinguish between people (and private corporations) with such wealth that it distorts political power like a black hole and those who are very wealthy compared with everyone else (multi-millionaires, for example) but don't post quite the same problems for democracy itself.

Just make every penny over $1bn at 100% tax - no write-offs, you can't donate it or split it to family, DNGAF if it's capital gains or whatever: every penny after gone. Go fuck off and retire, and let someone else have a go on the machine for a while.

It’s a problem in general, I agree, but a huge part of it is Citizens United. If the ultra rich‘s political influence would be reduced by limiting their financial donations, as it’s the case in many other countries, it would already be a huge step to reduce the threat.

Just cut off donations at 100 per person - or, hear me out - make campaigns funded by the Federal Government at $10m per candidate. NO donations. No PACs. NOTHING. All campaign funding is from government, and when it's gone - I hope you did a good job. Guess you'll have to run on POLICY!