Not to get all “no true Scotsman” here, but if you don’t want to tax billionaires until they’re not billionaires anymore then you’re not even close to being on the left in my book.
Billionaires are incompatible with any leftist system, so it’s nonsense to claim to be on the left without addressing billionaires not being billionaires as part of the to do list. We can disagree on how or on what timeline or what specifically to do with the billions, but it’s sort of core to the whole idea to not let so few own so much. People can try to claim that the state taking the billions is just making a couple of statesmen the new billionaires, but in a proper, controlled democracy, the state taking the billions means that all of the people are taking the billions, not just a few leaders. It reminds me of the argument of expanding the scotus. Just go ahead and expand it to 300 million or whatever. Boom, direct democracy. Vote by mail.
They’ve got the 8th highest amount of billionaires world wide of any city.
Per capita I think Jackson Hole Wyoming is the highest, due to multiple homes and cheap state tax. So everyone makes their luxury cabin out their their main residence.
But San Francisco kind of makes as the last place neoliberalsmwouldnhold onto.
And the thing is, if that’s as left as they can go, that shouldn’t be a problem. Because 99.99999% of the rest of the country isn’t obscenely wealthy and legitimately six months away from being a billionaire most of their career if they get lucky on an IPO.
They can get on the bus, they just shouldn’t be anywhere near the steering wheel.
Not to get all “no true Scotsman” here, but if you don’t want to tax billionaires until they’re not billionaires anymore then you’re not even close to being on the left in my book.
Billionaires are incompatible with any leftist system, so it’s nonsense to claim to be on the left without addressing billionaires not being billionaires as part of the to do list. We can disagree on how or on what timeline or what specifically to do with the billions, but it’s sort of core to the whole idea to not let so few own so much. People can try to claim that the state taking the billions is just making a couple of statesmen the new billionaires, but in a proper, controlled democracy, the state taking the billions means that all of the people are taking the billions, not just a few leaders. It reminds me of the argument of expanding the scotus. Just go ahead and expand it to 300 million or whatever. Boom, direct democracy. Vote by mail.
What if you don’t want to tax them, but seize their assets to convert all their businesses into worker coöps?
I mean…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_number_of_billionaires
They’ve got the 8th highest amount of billionaires world wide of any city.
Per capita I think Jackson Hole Wyoming is the highest, due to multiple homes and cheap state tax. So everyone makes their luxury cabin out their their main residence.
But San Francisco kind of makes as the last place neoliberalsmwouldnhold onto.
And the thing is, if that’s as left as they can go, that shouldn’t be a problem. Because 99.99999% of the rest of the country isn’t obscenely wealthy and legitimately six months away from being a billionaire most of their career if they get lucky on an IPO.
They can get on the bus, they just shouldn’t be anywhere near the steering wheel.