Time for a wealth tax in the USA! • page 6/6 • Off-Topic Discussion • lichess.org

"I do not find his wealth problematic"

Wealth is not problematic, but the corresponding poverty is.
One man's wealth is another man's misery.

"I do not find his wealth problematic" * Wealth is not problematic, but the corresponding poverty is. One man's wealth is another man's misery.

notsoneutral edited

@tpr said ^

Wealth is not problematic, but the corresponding poverty is.
One man's wealth is another man's misery.

We're leaving in a world where the politician who is the most powerful of planet earth thinks it's find to have AI companies stealing others' work ( without paying or an outrageously low wage ) is fine .

And to add to the insults, like scammers they're rebranding it under a new name
SI ( Super Intelligence ).

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/2q1CfBCW1Tc

@tpr said [^](/forum/redirect/post/euBBoqNa) > * Wealth is not problematic, but the corresponding poverty is. > One man's wealth is another man's misery. We're leaving in a world where the politician who is the most powerful of planet earth thinks it's find to have **AI companies stealing others' work** ( without paying or an outrageously low wage ) is fine . And to add to the insults, like scammers **they're rebranding it under a new name [SI ](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Ftrump-considers-rebranding-agi-super-duper-intelligence-v0-lgz1n3il3zsh1.png%3Fwidth%3D320%26crop%3Dsmart%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3Daf4b70566ac551e758f965d486ee4b409af2c7d2) ( Super Intelligence )**. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/2q1CfBCW1Tc

tpr

California holds a referendum about a 5% tax on billionaires.

Noflaps

edited

God help us if such baleful idiocy becomes law.

=============================================

I agree that seizing the already-taxed property of others (either by confiscation or by a new and shiny tax on it) might bail out the bad decisions of various politicians. But it sets a dangerous precedent, to say the least.

If they can seize from the accumulated affluence of living billionaires, will anybody be safe in future from the grasping hand of those who feel entitled to the assets of others? If your neighbor has less than you, is he or she entitled to just seize from you, because he or she decides (and is quite certain!) that it would be "fair" to do so? Maybe he or she thinks your job is too easy for what you make? Or maybe you're blessed with personal attributes from birth that make things easier for you?

Or maybe you just left a window open?

Billionaires can probably afford to move, ladies and gentlemen. Indeed, haven't some done so already? Billionaires are hard to surprise, too, after all. Will California do better, in the long run, by driving all or most of its wealth creators and innovators to Florida?

I wish so many weren't so stubbornly certain that their own conceptions were inarguably 'fair" and must be forced upon others without regard to consequence.

But I haven't posted for days, because it's clear minds change much less often than the seasons.

God help us if such baleful idiocy becomes law. ============================================= I agree that seizing the already-taxed property of others (either by confiscation or by a new and shiny tax on it) might bail out the bad decisions of various politicians. But it sets a dangerous precedent, to say the least. If they can seize from the accumulated affluence of living billionaires, will anybody be safe in future from the grasping hand of those who feel entitled to the assets of others? If your neighbor has less than you, is he or she entitled to just seize from you, because he or she decides (and is quite certain!) that it would be "fair" to do so? Maybe he or she thinks your job is too easy for what you make? Or maybe you're blessed with personal attributes from birth that make things easier for you? Or maybe you just left a window open? Billionaires can probably afford to move, ladies and gentlemen. Indeed, haven't some done so already? Billionaires are hard to surprise, too, after all. Will California do better, in the long run, by driving all or most of its wealth creators and innovators to Florida? I wish so many weren't so stubbornly certain that their own conceptions were inarguably 'fair" and must be forced upon others without regard to consequence. But I haven't posted for days, because it's clear minds change much less often than the seasons.