Because they are not gonna hate losing their ownership of the companies even more? Like it’s still significantly easier to push for reforms than completely toppling the economic system.
I don’t think we need to topple the system to make progress. But they can’t keep that wealth and power if we intend to live in a better world. Letting rich people write policy is a bit like letting the fox guard the henhouse. I’m not saying off with their heads, but we should set a practical cap on how much one person can own and at a minimum overturn Citizens United.
Unless you generally make it difficult to keep a fortune at some largest possible size fortunes will continue growing. Maybe we tax $1T at 100%, I don’t know, but we are going to have to inconvenience some rich people if we want to stop living in hell.
Because they are not gonna hate losing their ownership of the companies even more? Like it’s still significantly easier to push for reforms than completely toppling the economic system.
I don’t think we need to topple the system to make progress. But they can’t keep that wealth and power if we intend to live in a better world. Letting rich people write policy is a bit like letting the fox guard the henhouse. I’m not saying off with their heads, but we should set a practical cap on how much one person can own and at a minimum overturn Citizens United.
I am skeptical about a cap, but the rest is definitely true. Letting them have too much influence on policy is the issue.
Unless you generally make it difficult to keep a fortune at some largest possible size fortunes will continue growing. Maybe we tax $1T at 100%, I don’t know, but we are going to have to inconvenience some rich people if we want to stop living in hell.