this post was submitted on 17 May 2026
841 points (97.1% liked)

Progressive Politics

4619 readers
1099 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago (5 children)

$100m is still far more than one person could ever need. Why draw an arbitrary line at all? Why not use what's required to have a fair society as the starting point, and let the inability to accumulate such absurd levels of wealth derive naturally from that?

[–] kevin2107@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

capping at a hard number doesn't make sense when 100 million today means something different tomorrow. it should be relative to the cost of living. Anything over 200x cost of living could be considered not needed. But Republicans can't do math so back to square 1.

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I agree but first we need to start somewhere. To do what you are suggesting we need to destroy all billionaires and capitalism. That will take violence that the left just cant grasp unfortunately.

[–] in4apenny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

I also agree, but in order to outlaw anyone "earning" a billion dollars we would also still need to destroy all billionaires and capitalism. It seems the only way we can change this will take violence that the left just cant grasp unfortunately.

[–] 87Six@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

Yea. When you're so rich you could just not work a single other day in your life and still spend 10x a normal working class human would spend is where I'd cut it and make them pay out their asses.

[–] youcantreadthis@quokk.au 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why even have money its kind of a klunky bullshit abstraction

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I get currency as a fundamental concept, like I don't want to spend all day figuring out how many pints of goat's milk will power my car for X miles, but I agree that it's become far too abstract to be tenable

[–] youcantreadthis@quokk.au 1 points 20 hours ago

That's not how shit worked before money the need for precise tracking rather than general damn erins been carrying the whole neighborhood pretty hard and what has Steve even for anybody lately and how do I get Hector back for that cup of flour he spotted me in a way that will make him smile type thoughts a society that runs on making things work or making people happy runs better than a society that deliberately grinds to a halt every five seconds based on petty obsessive grievance adjacent bullshit believe it or not

[–] Prathas@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

arbitrary

There would be nothing arbitrary if we simply used a multiplier against the poverty line! If that number changes, then the cap changes; simple enough.