this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2025
478 points (99.6% liked)

Political Memes

6232 readers
2814 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works 134 points 6 hours ago (7 children)

We need a maximum wealth cap. I want to see a world where you are literally not allowed to have a net worth over a certain amount. I believe capitalism has its place, but unconstrained capitalism leads to innumerable social ills. You want to let people get rich enough to provide an incentive to get educated, work hard, start businesses, and innovate. But you do not want enough wealth that individuals or small groups of individuals can become a threat to society. We don't allow individuals to own nuclear weapons, regardless of how virtuous they may be. We decided long ago that private ownership of nuclear weapons is simply too much power in the hands of one individual.

Yet with enough wealth, an individual can create human misery equivalent to a nuclear weapon. For example, Elon Musk has a net worth of $400 billion. If he chose to, could spend his fortune on destroying the lives of 400,000 people. He could select his victims based on whatever criteria he chose. And he could spend $1 million per person simply hiring lawyers to make their lives Hell. Target them with frivolous lawsuits. Even if he never won a case, he could drive them into bankruptcy through legal fees alone. Or, he could pick a city of a million people and dedicate his fortune to just ruining that city. He could deliberately fund the campaigns of the worst candidates imaginable, and offer them enormous fortunes to deliberately destroy that city. Wealth is power, and power is wealth. They are equivalent and interchangeable. If you want to have a democracy, you cannot have unrestricted wealth.

I would set the wealth cap for any nation at 1000x the median household income of that nation, averaged over a certain number of years. In the US, that would be at this time about $80 million. That is a level of wealth even the most skilled and high-paid of lawyers or physicians, if they worked til the grave, lived like a pauper, and invested everything else, would still struggle to reach by the time of their death. The only way people reach that level of wealth is by leveraging the labor of others. And it is a level of wealth far, far above the level where increasing wealth continues to meaningfully increase happiness. That level of wealth is only useful to a person if that person seeks to manipulate and control other human beings.

We need a maximum wealth cap. Beyond a certain level of wealth, everything is taxed at 100%. I think 1000x the median household income is a good place to set that level. And I think that is extremely generous. I don't care what the former billionaires do with their extra income that would put them above this level. They could simply retire when they hit the cap. They could donate it to charity. They could give it all to their extended families. They could give it to their employees. They could hold grand parties in their home city every year that rivaled the excesses of ancient Rome. They could spend it all on giant yachts. Ultimately, I don't care. The core problem is the concentration of wealth and power in a small number of individuals. Any method of spreading out that wealth will avoid this problem. Even if they just give it all to their extended families, it would still be for the best. If Elon Musk wants to divvy up his fortune to his 5,000 closest family and friends, so be it. Even if every one of them was as much of a bastard as he was, at least they'll have conflicting interests, and few of them will want to see anyone appointed dictator.

We need a maximum wealth cap. Forget taxing incomes. Forget a wealth tax. We need to drive a dagger into the heart of the evil that haunts our society. The world does not need billionaires. We can have the benefits of efficiency and innovation that come with a free market without letting wealth concentrate to the point of farce. We can provide an incentive for people to work and discover without allowing individuals to become a threat to nation states. Even if you believe in the myth of visionary capitalist geniuses, we don't need billionaires. If Musk is already capped out on wealth, the board of SpaceX can still hire him as CEO. He can still enjoy the social status as influence of being the CEO of SpaceX, he just has to dispose of that wealth each year however he chooses.

1000x the median household income. No one should be able to have a fortune larger than this.

[–] Glide@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 hours ago

When people hit 10mil, they should prestiege. Give them a fancy title or add-on to their name, take all their wealth and tell them to do it again to hit the next prestiege. Easy fix, gives the 1% the sense of pride and accomplishment they deserve.

[–] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Or, he could pick a city of a million people and dedicate his fortune to just ruining that city. He could deliberately fund the campaigns of the worst candidates imaginable, and offer them enormous fortunes to deliberately destroy that city.

Or, he could pick a country of a few hundred million people and dedicate his fortune to just ruining that country. He could deliberately fund the campaigns of the worst candidates imaginable, and offer them enormous fortunes to deliberately destroy that country...

[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 5 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

We need to just ripoff good videogame balance. Videogames are regulated better than actual governments!

[–] RisingSwell@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 hours ago

Video games are definitely not regulated well. Literal slot machines are rated E for everyone. I don't even mean a system that behaves like it, one of the NBA games had a literal slot machine. Alongside all the rest of the gambling that's typically 18+ but is consistently rated E or 3+.

[–] TheOctonaut@mander.xyz 9 points 3 hours ago

Jesus Christ we just need you lads to not let them lynch minorities. Start there

[–] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 39 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

How about this: anything over said wealth cap is automatically used to fund education, health initiatives, as well as fight poverty and homelessness.

Also, politicians need a wealth cap; ie no stock trading while in office, or for 5 years after leaving office. Divest all ties to any business they have before taking office. They must also be prohibited from taking any job that has any relation to the government for at least 5 years after leaving office. All politicians must pay for their own health insurance.

[–] quink@lemmy.ml 18 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

How about this: anything over said wealth cap is automatically used to fund education, health initiatives, as well as fight poverty and homelessness.

Honestly, I agree with the top comment, and is already implied by the top comment with the 100% tax. If they want to cash it out (before that assessment, or when they're close to it) and burn it in a big pile instead of giving it to anybody in tax or charity, let them do it. It'll still have a positive effect through deflation.

All politicians must pay for their own health insurance.

lol, no. Everybody gets free health insurance. The end. That's the way to go on that.

[–] kamenlady@lemmy.world 7 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I also agree with the top comment and with your comment too. It's settled then?

When?

[–] quink@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

Eh, I'm in Australia, where the problem's not that big, so I certainly don't feel any overwhelming pressure. While it's different from wealth, the top income bracket threshold went from $180,000 to $190,000 between 2008 and 2024, despite inflation making that $180,000 equivalent to $270,000 in the meantime, even under right-wing governments. And all working Australians have superannuation, sometimes considerable sums. So things here at least are fine. But anyone in the US, sure, get off your butts and go do something. Here even the most despised billionaire is about as rich as she was back in 2012, and there's at least some good evidence of her philanthropy. Australia's in 9th place for wealth inequality apparently. The United States is 25th... from the bottom. That's guillotine, or give your money away, territory.

None of that means that I won't ask Americans to do something about it, I mean your hideous wealth inequality is affecting us too.

[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 15 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I'd also add that companies/government offices should not be permitted to pay any employee more than 100x the annual income of their lowest paid employee. If the owners/executives want to further enrich themselves, they must first enrich those whose labor they profit from.

Include stock incentives in that as well. If executives are offered stock packages in lieu of part of their pay to try to get around this rule, require that proportional offers must also be made to all other employees based on level of income.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 11 points 5 hours ago

I’d also add that companies/government offices should not be permitted to pay any employee more than 100x the annual income of their lowest paid employee.

Sadly this wouldn't be difficult to loophole. Today's corporations would simply create nested contracting companies. As in, top execs would be one company where the lowest paid employee is a highly compensated Executive VP and the highest the CEO. The next step down being Senior VP that reports to that Executive VP would be the highest paid employee in a separate company that is contracted to the first company housing the high execs. Repeat until you get to the person that waters the flowers in the lobby.

Here's a visual to show the relationships between these companies and the contract linkage:

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 6 points 5 hours ago

Money is pretty much potential human energy. Much like your nuclear bomb example, no one would accept living with a neighbor that has a literal army in their backyard. The government wouldn't nor would anyone living near them. Yet having that much wealth is having that much "human potential energy" that could power an army. As we can already see with what the billionaires do, they inspire the labor of huge masses of people on their behalf to wreak havock on society. They buy entire media ecosystems to manipulate. No one should have that much power, it's literally dangerous for all of us.

[–] itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml 55 points 6 hours ago

It's great that my taxes are going up so they can have even more.

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 14 points 5 hours ago

Party of the oligarchy, soon to be the one true party thanks to systemic failure of education in this country.

[–] RedditWanderer@lemmy.world 39 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

The trick was seeing what was going on before trying to "teach the dems a lesson". Now all you can do is ride the train and wait for endless lawsuits to playout with disingenuous participants

Nixon was already impeached by now

[–] Saleh@feddit.org 8 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Now all you can do is ride the train and wait for endless lawsuits to playout with disingenuous participants

There is a lot more you can do. Stop being defeatist. This kind of attitude got us into the train wreck that is 21st. Century US in the first place. And not accepting the oligarchy presenting you two flavors of oligarchy to vote between is part of what needs to be changed.

[–] shittydwarf@lemmy.dbzer0.com 30 points 6 hours ago (1 children)
[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 20 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

We've been in a class war for the past few decades. But at least one of the classes doesn't know/care that it's happening.

[–] Quexotic@infosec.pub 7 points 5 hours ago

That's right. They've been killing us. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tq7SGQzeCEw