Individual Wealth Cap

a reply to: namehere

mostly because there is no appreciable difference between 50 billion or 100 billion, essentially, Bill Gates.

he wouldn't donate the money if he needed the spending power. donating the money is the only spending power left.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: namehere
the very idea spits in the face of individual freedom and equality and it's very much unconstitutional, why would we do such a thing when our position of an economic superpower isn't being threatened anytime in the foreseeable future.

why even suggest such socialist nonsense when most people in America (alnost 90%) are living well above poverty and doing just fine?

they do not want a successful USA
they want a global nanny state

because they themselves are too lazy to achieve.

originally posted by: toolgal462

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: namehere
the very idea spits in the face of individual freedom and equality and it's very much unconstitutional, why would we do such a thing when our position of an economic superpower isn't being threatened anytime in the foreseeable future.

why even suggest such socialist nonsense when most people in America (alnost 90%) are living well above poverty and doing just fine?

they do not want a successful USA
they want a global nanny state

because they themselves are too lazy to achieve.

that or their selfish anger directed to an easy target
participation trophies are rotten

a reply to: toolgal462

thats the entire point, if joe makes 100 trillion, he has indirectly limited YOUR spending power, without even increasing his

in real life, things don't cost a trillion dollars, but the inflation still happens

a reply to: idiotseverywhere
no
he really hasn't

a reply to: shooterbrody

I'm lazy and I could achieve much more if I wasn't lazy.

BUT, I still work for everything I have and by any standard, I do alright though I don't want for much.

And I blame no one but myself for my laziness.

I do not hate on people who have much more than I do. I know if I wanted to earn more $$ I could choose to work harder and not BS the day away on ats

a reply to: shooterbrody

So I shouldn't care at all.

I should just pretend this system is working just fine. So the $100,000 that I saved 20 years ago that is only worth $50,000 now in purchasing power because of the system itself and how much fiat is created out of thin air on a daily basis? The Fed is good and just? Our financial system is good and just?

That is stealing from someone else? Just to want to keep the purchasing power of fiat stable over time so what I save now will have the same purchasing power 20 or 40 years down the line? That I won't be forced to invest that fiat into risky assets just to keep up with inflation is wrong? Why?

a reply to: shooterbrody

except he has because his property he doesnt even care to negotiate for price on just inflates the entire market, and this also happens with everything he buys, you want a seat at the local stadium? he bought every seat. this kind of stuff will start to happen, and already does if you're not so blind to it. being excessively rich doesnt just mean you are rich, in a tender currency it's indirectly making others poor

a reply to: ClovenSky

If you don't like inflation, stop electing people that are in love with deficit spending. the fact that the US government is 23 Trillion dollars in debt has a MUCH greater impact on inflation than any of the billionaires on the planet.

If you confiscated all the wealth of the 1% world wide, you still couldn't pay off the US national debt....

Let that sink in for a bit...

originally posted by: idiotseverywhere
a reply to: toolgal462

thats the entire point, if joe makes 100 trillion, he has indirectly limited YOUR spending power, without even increasing his

in real life, things don't cost a trillion dollars, but the inflation still happens

This just proves how little you understand the economy.

If joe makes 100 trillion, then he has a lot of money to buy things or invest in things that in turn make JOBS for people, who in turn make money and pay taxes.

If joe makes only 1 trillion he has less money to put out there into circulation that in turns creates more jobs, more money and more tax dollars too.

Please, you must be trolling, you can't be this uneducated.

eta: If you cap joe at 1 trillion, that is 99 trillion dollars NOT circulating into the economy. Or if Joe simply keeps his 99 trillion stuffed in his mattress and doesn't buy a thing or even invest that money - then it does no good to him and does no harm to you.

It’s all constant hyperbole and irrational responses. Nothing addressing your point because it flies in the face of their religion. Don’t bother, really. You can tell who adults, because they will give reasoned responses and legitimate thoughts on your topic. All the rest are just trolls here to stroke their egos playing their thought police game.

a reply to: idiotseverywhere

What happens if you own a business and it becomes so successful that its value becomes more than 1 billion? Do you confiscate the business? Do you force that person to make their business a publicly owned or traded endeavor?

a reply to: toolgal462

dude, no one can keep up with that forever. I seriously doubt bill gates could properly handle 100 trillion and he's way smarter than joe

a reply to: ketsuko

I think the cap should represent individual networths, and not communal aspects like companies, business, or services like church groups etc

google needs their money, but larry already proved he didnt need his.

Time to bail on this thread.

Nice to see you Ketsuko but trust me, you will be dumber for spending any time here.

lol

a reply to: BomSquad

isn't it not a cyclical debt? the idea you cannot pay it off is why it works?

a reply to: idiotseverywhere

what in gods name are you even saying, speak English will you? besides, bill gates donated most of his wealth on helping the needy all over the globe and is probably almost responsible for the economic rise of nearly every poor nation on earth including india and china, all because capitalism enabled him and other rich people to develop those nations by spending large amounts of their own money for decades.

without rich people investing in the world billions would still be suffering in poverty right now.

a reply to: ClovenSky

So I shouldn't care at all.

Did I post that?
I missed that part.

I should just pretend this system is working just fine.

again did I post that?
I missed that part as well.

So the $100,000 that I saved 20 years ago that is only worth $50,000 now in purchasing power because of the system itself and how much fiat is created out of thin air on a daily basis? The Fed is good and just? Our financial system is good and just?

perhaps you invested poorly?
but it is easier to blame the ultra successful, and they are only a few, so violating their rights is ok?

That is stealing from someone else? Just to want to keep the purchasing power of fiat stable over time so what I save now will have the same purchasing power 20 or 40 years down the line?

dont blame the system
you could have bought gold
its price has doubled over the last 30 years
you wouldnt have lost any purchasing power
but go on and blame others

originally posted by: idiotseverywhere
a reply to: shooterbrody

except he has because his property he doesnt even care to negotiate for price on just inflates the entire market, and this also happens with everything he buys, you want a seat at the local stadium? he bought every seat. this kind of stuff will start to happen, and already does if you're not so blind to it. being excessively rich doesnt just mean you are rich, in a tender currency it's indirectly making others poor

and that is a load of crap
entirely bovine excrement

no thanks taking others rights

a reply to: BomSquad

Na, it will be more interesting to watch the implosion. The steadfast rejection that anything is wrong with this system and that people are just lazy and complainers for thinking there is a better way, will bring more change than trying to right this listing ship.

We are seeing it already. The newest generation embracing socialism. I don't think it will make much of a change for the ultra wealthy. They will still hold the wealth, power and control. It really won't make a difference to them in the long run but it will start opening eyes of the status quo, it is already.