▲ 860 ▼ Do you agree with this? (lemmy.zip) submitted 5 months ago by favoredponcho@lemmy.zip to c/progressivepolitics@lemmy.world 176 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 5 months ago (2 children) No, it should be 10% at least. permalink fedilink source hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago (1 child) We could tax a billionaire 95% of their wealth, and they would still have more money than you or I could reasonably spend in a lifetime. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 5 months ago Oh yeah, I'm a big proponent of no more billionaires. But it appears to a lot of average people smaller amounts are more palpable because they think they'll ever be that rich. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago (1 child) We could tax a billionaire 95% of their wealth, and they would still have more money than you or I could reasonably spend in a lifetime. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 5 months ago Oh yeah, I'm a big proponent of no more billionaires. But it appears to a lot of average people smaller amounts are more palpable because they think they'll ever be that rich. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 5 months ago Oh yeah, I'm a big proponent of no more billionaires. But it appears to a lot of average people smaller amounts are more palpable because they think they'll ever be that rich. permalink fedilink source parent
