| |
| ▲ | themafia 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You don't have to eat them. You just have to erect significant barriers to hoarding wealth, particularly in off shore devices, and you have to create constant pressure to ensure that stored wealth is best re-invested in the economy at large. These aren't even hard problems. Until you meet someone in Congress. Then it suddenly seems hopeless. | | |
| ▲ | PeterHolzwarth 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | >and you have to create constant pressure to ensure that stored wealth is best re-invested in the economy at large I have no idea if this is true (I've asked economists-in-training, they say they'll get back to me), but I've read that the huge increases in tax rates on high income during the war was less to generate revenue (tho more revenue was certainly a need - there was also a growing focus on growing the number of people who paid taxes, which prior had been quite small), but more to ensure profits were not realized and instead kept invested in the economy and the war machine. A kind of practical "hodl" to keep the wartime economy stock with reinvestment - or really to discourage removing money from industrial investment - to benefit the war-time economy. Would like links to things to learn more about this line of reasoning. | |
| ▲ | twoodfin 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | ensure that stored wealth is best re-invested in the economy at large Pretty sure the vast, vast bulk of wealth held by the richest US households is indeed “reinvested in the economy at large”. Where do you think it is instead? | | |
| ▲ | shimman 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Supporting companies that profit off of misery, reduce human meaningfulness, those that innovate the surveillance state; why is it so hard to support policies like giving US school children free breakfast + lunch, medicare for all, public housing, universal childcare, federally mandated paid time off, universal higher education + vocational training, and a public jobs program (all things that have 70-90% voter approval across party lines; the new deal coalition literally had control of both houses of Congress for nearly 60 years unabated)? Programs that would literally unleash hundreds of trillions in monetary + societal benefits, why should the US population care about the wealth of the few compared to what we can do to provide meaningful lives collectively? The idea that less than 100 people in the country have some sort of mandated right from the devil to dictate the direction of technology in our country should fill every single decent human being with disgust. We must correct this. The fact that several hyper scale data centers could provide US school children free lunches + breakfast for a year should be the first immediate sign that something is deeply wrong with our country. |
| |
| ▲ | pfannkuchen 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Isn’t hoarded wealth a no-op? It just reduces the supply of whatever they are hoarding. Would the people benefit from redistributing the things they are hoarding? Corporate stock that pays little to no dividends, mainly? It’s not like they are hoarding wheat. I don’t really get what people think will happen if we redistribute the stored wealth. All wealth is, is a claim to direct labor and materials, the magnitude of which is relative to the total amount of wealth competing to direct those at present. If some portion of the wealth is locked away, the labor and materials are still being deployed, just the total pool of wealth competing to direct them is smaller than it would be otherwise. Unlocking wealth does not actually bring more stuff into existence. Now, it could redirect labor and materials used to built yachts or luxury homes into more practical goods. But my impression is that the labor and materials used for those things are minuscule compared to the overall economy, and most of the wealth of the very wealthy is not actually used for those sorts of things. | | |
| ▲ | enraged_camel 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | >> Isn’t hoarded wealth a no-op? It just reduces the supply of whatever they are hoarding. It’s not. Wealth creates political power, which the wealthy wield to stack the odds in their own favor at the expense of everyone else. | | |
| ▲ | pfannkuchen 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Is that the topic of discussion? I thought it was something along the lines of “tax the rich so we can do things with the money”. That is the area I’m saying it is a no-op in. Statements without context frequently don’t mean the same as what they mean with context. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | Nevermark 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Big problems are solved by years of investment and good decision making. Unfortunately, going after causes or correcting symptom in any kind of hurry acts as a massive destabilizer at exactly the moment systemic destabilization provides the motive/momentum for taking action. Hard course corrections at critical pressure, in a complex system, is a value destroying reset. Companies can do this. Mass layoffs, capitalization sell off, etc. And then recover over time, because the rest of the economy around them is mores stable and the pain gets diluted. Entire countries doing this doesn't work out so well. But it would appear, that may be the path we are most likely to take. |
|
