this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2023
125 points (100.0% liked)

Moving to: m/AskMbin!

18 readers
5 users here now

### We are moving! **Join us in our new journey as we take a new direction towards the future for this community at mbin, find our new community here and read this post to know more about why we are moving. Thank you and we hope to see you there!**

founded 1 year ago
 

I don't mean doctor-making-150k-a-year rich, I mean properly rich with millions to billions of dollars.

I think many will say yes, they can be, though it may be rare. I was tempted to. I thought more about it and I wondered, are you really a good person if you're hoarding enough money you and your family couldn't spend in 10 lifetimes?

I thought, if you're a good person, you wouldn't be rich. And if you're properly rich you're probably not a good person.

I don't know if it's fair or naive to say, but that's what I thought. Whether it's what I believe requires more thought.

There are a handful of ex-millionaires who are no longer millionaires because they cared for others in a way they couldn't care for themselves. Only a handful of course, I would say they are good people.

And in order to stay rich, you have to play your role and participate in a society that oppresses the poor which in turn maintains your wealth. Are you really still capable of being a good person?

Very curious about people's thoughts on this.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If I find a painting at goodwill that turns out to be worth $100 million, should I be expected to pay taxes on that $100 million even though I only make $20/hour?

Obviously you sell the painting to pay the taxes on it. Then you still have $80 million or whatever. Sounds fair to me.

[–] Tango@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I simply disagree with taxing someone on the perceived value of an asset. I know that's how property taxes work, and yes, I disagree with that too. You shouldn't tax someone on simply owning an asset.

[–] Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And you're okay with that making it functionally impossible to tax rich people?

[–] Tango@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

I think the focus on rich people is misguided. You would get way more tax money by properly taxing corporations than you would by taxing billionaires. The personal income of even top level billionaires is still peanuts compared to corporate profits, which can be hundreds of billions per year. I don't care if Musk of Bezos has a personal wealth of hundreds of billions, that money doesn't exist, it's the hypothetical market value of their stock holdings. But major corporations do actually have hundreds of billions of actual liquid income every year, so to me that's fair game for taxing. If Walmart profits $150 billion in a year, then sure, go to town and heavily tax that, because that is actual money and not just value.

[–] Tango@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think the focus on rich people is misguided. You would get way more tax money by properly taxing corporations than you would by taxing billionaires. The personal income of even top level billionaires is still peanuts compared to corporate profits, which can be hundreds of billions per year. I don't care if Musk or Bezos has a personal wealth of hundreds of billions, that money doesn't exist, it's the hypothetical market value of their stock holdings. But major corporations do actually have hundreds of billions of actual liquid income every year, so to me that's fair game for taxing. If Walmart profits $150 billion in a year, then sure, go to town and heavily tax that, because that is actual money and not just value.

[–] Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

I guess we just have a fundamental disagreement then. I see no reason to exempt wealth from taxation. Personal or corporate wealth.