Employees with experience of electric car manufacturing now with the opportunity to work at the other electric car manufacturers that will step up to fill the gap left by Tesla?
Or just taking a job helping eradicate world hunger
I mean, we’re talking about taking the wealth and distributing it for more constructive purposes, if it doesn’t demolish a handful of fortune 500s in the process we’ve made a mistake. Those fortunes would then be able to be used to take all the workers pointlessly generating wealth for the billionaire class and start working on socially useful ventures
It depends, in theory Amazon should be more efficient but that only works if you close most of the brick and mortar stores and replace it with housing or something useful.
Right now, most corporations are organized like monarchies or oligarchies where the guys on the top make the rules, and the rest just execute them. This would democratize corporate ownership. We spend at least half of our time awake at work. We should have a voice on how the companies we work for should operate.
I'm a software developer, and in the big companies I worked for until today, there is a big disconnect between the decisions taken up high and us, the workers. I've seen so much talent be wasted because upper management only cares about short term profit. Or inhumane decisions like laying off an entire site a week before Christmas.
Well yes, but unless you dismantle things it'll probably backfire. A ton of that wealth is in owning companies, and if that ownership transfered to the state, it would need to be liquidated by selling it to... someone. Which would tank stocks, which would then tank 401ks and IRAs and a lot of other retirement funds, etc.. It would get messy and a ton of non-billionares would be impacted.
Now you can argue that you then use your newfound government cash to pay a new universal social security, and that's possible but you'd need to design all that ahead of time. Plus if your goal is to not impact people with less than a billion... well, no dice. It's hard to target just the billionaires, basically.
Still, if we could at least start the process that'd be lovely. Dismantling the whole system is more effective and way better, but my money would be on gradual socialist improvements paid via higher taxes and not a system overhaul. As it is, we're going backwards, though, so meh.
If you're in this community, it's because you believe the system should be dismantled and replaced. I understand this post may be confusing because of that, but it's more of a thought experiment.
That fact of "eliminating hunger for 216" years is also very likely not taking into account how much devaluation will happen once you dump about 2 trillion stagnant dollars into the economy, Mansa Musa style. The actual dollar value that is given from Billionaires to everybody else won't matter so much on a global hunger logistics scale once every civilian has been paid out.
The fact is that straight up puncturing all of the money directly out of a BILLIONAIRE all at once won't entirely and suddenly solve all of the problems you can ponder. It will still take time, effort, and lots of work from everyone in the production/supply chain. Although that work we all need to do will be a lot less stressful with plenty of food on the table and cheap houses on the market.
I think the biggest problem with these kind of calculations is that you can't just take money from someone, regardless of your opinion of them or how they obtained so much wealth.
You can, actually! The easiest way is by force, sometimes lethal.
After all, that would mean that the government/whoever's in power could just as quickly take your money too. Assuming you want an equal society.
Once I have over a billion dollars, then they could and I would understand. They already take poor peoples' money all the time, and sometimes kill them, directly or indirectly.
Yeah, we're not going to spread this liberal reddit shit in this community under my watch. Take ten days and come back when you're ready to not empathize with billionaires and their "investments." This is not a space to discuss liberal economics.
Liberals espouse various and often mutually warring views depending on their understanding of these principles but generally support private property, market economies,
Economic liberalism is a political and economic ideology that supports a market economy based on individualism and private property in the means of production.
We can do whatever we collectively decide we will tolerate. When you say "we can't do X" what you really mean is "I don't think it's a good idea to do X". Those are very different things.
Hardly anyone on Lemmy understands or wants to understand economics. It's like black magic to them: they rightfully fear that the knowledge be infectious, and shed the dumbest part of leftism off of them. When your political ideology is 95% of your personality, that's a scary thought.
Why would we flood the streets? Invest the money in public projects, services, etc. People work them as jobs, now we have more middle class - other businesses make money selling them services - the economy grows.
For an example of this working in America look up Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “New Deal”.
Where in the post was this suggested or even referenced? I see nothing indicating “just give everyone lots of money, yay!”, but I do see how the money referenced could be put to use.
But anyway, since we're already off topic, let's abolish currency and give everyone what they need instead of creating a system that encourages the hoarding of wealth and resources.
"ThIs Is NoT hOw MoNeY wOrKs" <-- take that arrogance to reddit
The same companies most possibly destroying our planet? The horror
Employees with experience of electric car manufacturing now with the opportunity to work at the other electric car manufacturers that will step up to fill the gap left by Tesla?
Or just taking a job helping eradicate world hunger
Ahahaha yeah no, say Hi to hydrogen cells powered by coal and oil.
In that case, let's do it and destroy the companies at the same time. Two birds with one stone.
I mean, we’re talking about taking the wealth and distributing it for more constructive purposes, if it doesn’t demolish a handful of fortune 500s in the process we’ve made a mistake. Those fortunes would then be able to be used to take all the workers pointlessly generating wealth for the billionaire class and start working on socially useful ventures
It depends, in theory Amazon should be more efficient but that only works if you close most of the brick and mortar stores and replace it with housing or something useful.
Just give the shares to the employees who do the actual work.
Right now, most corporations are organized like monarchies or oligarchies where the guys on the top make the rules, and the rest just execute them. This would democratize corporate ownership. We spend at least half of our time awake at work. We should have a voice on how the companies we work for should operate.
I'm a software developer, and in the big companies I worked for until today, there is a big disconnect between the decisions taken up high and us, the workers. I've seen so much talent be wasted because upper management only cares about short term profit. Or inhumane decisions like laying off an entire site a week before Christmas.
Well yes, but unless you dismantle things it'll probably backfire. A ton of that wealth is in owning companies, and if that ownership transfered to the state, it would need to be liquidated by selling it to... someone. Which would tank stocks, which would then tank 401ks and IRAs and a lot of other retirement funds, etc.. It would get messy and a ton of non-billionares would be impacted.
Now you can argue that you then use your newfound government cash to pay a new universal social security, and that's possible but you'd need to design all that ahead of time. Plus if your goal is to not impact people with less than a billion... well, no dice. It's hard to target just the billionaires, basically.
Still, if we could at least start the process that'd be lovely. Dismantling the whole system is more effective and way better, but my money would be on gradual socialist improvements paid via higher taxes and not a system overhaul. As it is, we're going backwards, though, so meh.
If you're in this community, it's because you believe the system should be dismantled and replaced. I understand this post may be confusing because of that, but it's more of a thought experiment.
Idk, dismantling the system historically has had some bad outcomes.
Also true. Actually, humanity itself generally seems to lead to bad outcomes.
Yeah but all of the good stuff was because of thorough, complex, well planned collaborative efforts.
That fact of "eliminating hunger for 216" years is also very likely not taking into account how much devaluation will happen once you dump about 2 trillion stagnant dollars into the economy, Mansa Musa style. The actual dollar value that is given from Billionaires to everybody else won't matter so much on a global hunger logistics scale once every civilian has been paid out.
The fact is that straight up puncturing all of the money directly out of a BILLIONAIRE all at once won't entirely and suddenly solve all of the problems you can ponder. It will still take time, effort, and lots of work from everyone in the production/supply chain. Although that work we all need to do will be a lot less stressful with plenty of food on the table and cheap houses on the market.
Aaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
Thanks for listening.
But what if I do want to reduce the number of billionaires?
You'll have to unclog the pipes of society. I'd recommend a good plumber.
The worst part is most of that money would end up right where it started.
Yeah true. El problema es el capitalismo.
You can always redo it. Family wealth counting together next time.
I agree, but don't let the subtext to this be why even try (not saying your sentiment is cynical, but people will read it this way).
A lot of good can be done by the right kind of disruption. Won't solve the system, but would allow for some economic mobility
You can, actually! The easiest way is by force, sometimes lethal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine_(penalty)
Once I have over a billion dollars, then they could and I would understand. They already take poor peoples' money all the time, and sometimes kill them, directly or indirectly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_the_United_States
I'm all for the government taking all my money if it ends world hunger and saves the climate lmao
Especially if it leaves me a billionaire
Yeah, we're not going to spread this liberal reddit shit in this community under my watch. Take ten days and come back when you're ready to not empathize with billionaires and their "investments." This is not a space to discuss liberal economics.
Based mod
Isn't the original post here a Reddit screenshot?
Last I checked, r/LateStageCapitalism wasn't a liberal/pro-capitalist subreddit.
Yeah, but they're also dumb and factually wrong on a number of issues and don't use good logic. Socialism is fine, they just get basic stuff wrong.
If you think that's bad, you should see the anarchist subreddits.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_liberalism
That’s a very US centric view and not even correct there.
Lol what does that have to do with the definition of liberalism
We can do whatever we collectively decide we will tolerate. When you say "we can't do X" what you really mean is "I don't think it's a good idea to do X". Those are very different things.
Alright then, so we're voting into government offices pro-tax-the-rich politicians?
Because good fucking luck, clearly.
They didn’t suggest giving everyone a million dollars, they suggested using the seized money to pay people to do work on giant social issues.
It could feed everybody - by paying farmers the normal rate for their food.
It could halt climate change - by paying people the normal rate to install renewable energy.
The number of jobs would increase, and society’s problems would be solved, all without causing hyperinflation via huge handouts.
BUT IF PEOPLE DIDN'T DIE FOR CAPITALISM, WHAT'S LEFT TO KEEP THE REST OF US IN LINE AND IN FEAR???
Do we actually understand the full impact of such a move? I'd like to hear an economists' take on this.
edit: downvotes for curiosity. Kinda sad.
Maybe the closest thing like this would be the New Deal program after the Great Depression.
Hardly anyone on Lemmy understands or wants to understand economics. It's like black magic to them: they rightfully fear that the knowledge be infectious, and shed the dumbest part of leftism off of them. When your political ideology is 95% of your personality, that's a scary thought.
Why would we flood the streets? Invest the money in public projects, services, etc. People work them as jobs, now we have more middle class - other businesses make money selling them services - the economy grows.
For an example of this working in America look up Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “New Deal”.
Where in the post was this suggested or even referenced? I see nothing indicating “just give everyone lots of money, yay!”, but I do see how the money referenced could be put to use.
Everything you think you know about economics is wrong, and you probably learned it because an oligarch tricked you.
Your comment is bizarrely off-topic.
But anyway, since we're already off topic, let's abolish currency and give everyone what they need instead of creating a system that encourages the hoarding of wealth and resources.
"ThIs Is NoT hOw MoNeY wOrKs" <-- take that arrogance to reddit
If a company cannot afford to pay employees a living wage, then that company can go fuck itself. I don't' care if it's McDonalds.
You're confounding redistributing money versus injecting money.
Gotta keep people poor so they're willing to flip burgers for you
You base your rates on how much money you have in the bank?