this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2025
926 points (98.2% liked)

Memes

49990 readers
1 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Devide

verb

Obsolete form of divide.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 55 points 11 months ago
[–] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 46 points 11 months ago (1 children)

First you need to stop money from systematically flowing to the top or that dividing is only going to be a temporary measure.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (5 children)
[–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 21 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

I'd argue there should be a flat out cap on wealth. Nobody should have 500 billion dollars. Not sure what it should be, but somewhere under 500 billion.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 15 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Would be nice, would still require a revolution.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago
[–] Piemanding@sh.itjust.works 10 points 11 months ago

You can have a soft cap with higher taxes as wealth goes up.

[–] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago (1 children)

To name a few:

  • the classic riot, violence and/or revolution
  • the coup
  • organizing through unions and have general strikes until things change
  • sustained peaceful protest
  • voting
  • switching to a different (underground) economic system
  • massive emigration

All come with some serious downsides of course.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 months ago

or to sum it up: socialism

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (12 children)
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 11 months ago

Would require either revolution or threat of it to pass to a meaninful degree.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CyberMonkey404@lemmy.ml 39 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's not "their" money. It's our communal wealth, stolen and privatised

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago

It's 100% their money. They control its rules, and it's designed to make them rich at our expense. Their money is part of how they steal our wealth.

[–] whostosay@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Yes, but I'll do the dividing. Just trust me on this one

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ThomasCrappersGhost@feddit.uk 14 points 11 months ago (4 children)

The rich will just come up with clever ways to get paid that avoids paying tax.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] bluewing@lemm.ee 14 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Isn't that what taxation pretty much does? Takes money and redistributes it?

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Not in the US at the federal level. Taxes are an anti inflationary device when dealing with a sovereign currency. It's the last step of the fiscal year. Step one is literally printing money, step two is distribution of those funds, step three is to allow the money to circulate between businesses and people, and then step four at the end of the year is to levy taxes to combat inflation. They used to literally burn the dollars they collected, now they just zero out an entry in a ledger.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I suppose OP is proposing a wealth tax.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 points 11 months ago

I think it's more about Socialism than taxation.

[–] MrMobius@sh.itjust.works 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Isn't that the definition of taxation and redistribution of wealth?

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Yes but if we can't spell divide I'm not sure I'd hold out hope for nuanced or accurate political commentary.

[–] plumbercraic@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What have we got to loose?

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 12 points 11 months ago (2 children)

We half nothing too loose but our chain’s.

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

I had multiple involuntary physical reactions to that sentence.

You win.

[–] MrMobius@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago

No need to shame people for their spelling. You never know, the person in question might not be a native english speaker or could have dislexia.

[–] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Stop letting them borrow against it.

[–] Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No, no, no. Just like a tax on unrealized gains is a bad idea because of how much it would royally fuck up the stock market, including every 401(k). What they need to do instead is tax the ways used by the extremely wealthy to utilize their gains without technically realizing them, even if that sometimes means taxing debt (aka treating it as income when they borrow against it and taxing accordingly).

[–] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Yes, changing the status quo is going to require some sacrifice. But we have more to gain by seizing their wealth than we do by protecting our crumbs.

[–] badcommandorfilename@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

Everyone in this thread should support an inheritance tax

It is not a "death tax" it's a tax on unearned, undeserved income

[–] danc4498@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

But their nephew’s painting on the wall is worth a million bucks.

[–] Coreidan@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Come on man you can’t even spell divide

[–] Frog@lemmy.ca 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I came here to lead, not to read!

[–] Mr_Blott@feddit.uk 2 points 11 months ago

It's gold, not lead

[–] Hamartia@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Devide

verb

Obsolete form of divide.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 4 points 11 months ago
[–] Coreidan@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago
[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago

Yes, the same people who couldn't get past the DNC to get Bernie nominated are certainly going to ge able to redistribute all the wealth.

[–] Schal330@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

How about capping the amount they can earn above their lowest paid employee? For them to rise they have to take everyone with them

[–] Hamartia@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

They'd just 'devide' up their businesses into a chain of symbiotic entities defined by paygrade. Then the executive level can enrich itself insulated from us front line grunts.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Or to be realistic, maximum ten times more.

Let people dream a bit!

load more comments
view more: next ›