• grte@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      77
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      That’s exactly how the article suggests setting the maximum.

        • Overzeetop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Wage is worthless wording. Most ultra rich don’t have wages - at least not relative to their change in worth. We need to change how taxes fundamentally work.

        • Victor Villas@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          Yes, but anyone with two brain cells can understand that it’s a wordplay on “minimum wage” and the implementation of this isn’t really going to rely on the narrow definition of wages.

    • maxprime@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      How does that work when the super rich don’t pay any taxes to begin with? How do you tax wealth? How do you tax loans against shares?

      • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        43
        ·
        9 months ago

        in the united states, there were all kinds of ‘wealth’ taxes that prevented the loop holes. all that was systematically deleted over the last 60 years as conservatives decided ‘me want money, fuck society’

        • UmeU@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          And watch the few remaining small businesses who are operating on a shoestring budget and are the only ones actually paying capital gains get eaten up by the large corporations who offshore their gains. Small businesses who have debt aren’t able to write off principal debt payments so on the books they make money that they pay tax on, but in reality they just gave that money back to the bank to pay off ‘business assets’ which aren’t worth shit when the business isn’t making money. So they make just enough money to pay the bank, then are hit with taxes for the money they paid the bank, and they float by in the red until the inevitable bankruptcy. If they are a franchise, corporate then comes in and sells the business to the next sucker who is willing to gamble on the false hope of the franchise model. Big corporate sells the business to a new ‘owner’ every 5 or 10 years, and the banks get another government backed SBA loan with no risk.

          We are in the latter days of capitalism, increasing capital gains won’t work when the big guys already don’t pay shit.

            • LostWon@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              …or just abolish the stock market (at least that’s how I read this).

              • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                9 months ago

                At this point, abolishing the stock market would require a restart on the United States as an entity. The stock market is quite closely linked to the banking system. Closing the stock market would crash the US economy into oblivion.

            • maxprime@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              The problem is that’s basically what billionaires do, though. They take out loans with their shares as collateral. So on paper they have huge debt, but it’s minuscule compared to their wealth.

    • slowbyrne@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      Take a listen to the recent Grey Area podcast episode with Ingrid Robeyns. Her book is “Limitarianism: The Case Against Extreme Wealth.” and they talk about this very subject.