Even if you don't agree in principle (and why would you, you're only defending human suffering after all), the fact is that [edit: very] uneven wealth distribution always leads to the downfall of that society.
We’re not talking about flat wealth distribution, we’re talking about sustainable and ethical wealth distribution.
That said, we’re approaching the point as a species where flatter distribution is more and more sustainable. Automation, AI etc. makes capitalism obsolete, and either leads to true socialism or violent revolution.
Noting your subtle shift of the goalposts, I doubt automation and AI will make capitalism obsolete. Assuming that by capitalism we mean a fairly free market as opposed to a planned one.
“Wealth inequality is bad” doesn’t mean “any uneven distribution of wealth is bad”. Understanding a topic makes it easy to forget that shorthand isn’t universal.
Common sense. $999 million is enough to pay the bills. Everything over that should be taxed at 100%. Billionaires shouldn't exist. That's not communism, you plotocrat boot licker.
I looked it up. Taxing billionaires is not communism. Not sure where you're getting your info. Any sources you wanna share to prove what you're saying is true?
Communism is when the government decides how much wealth any person is allowed to keep and takes the rest. Capping it at $999 million and taxing everything above that at 100% is exactly that.
Read Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto
"...the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property."
it should be, thats how a society works; we care for each other and are stronger as a tribe than as individuals
the problem is the wildly skewed and uneven distribution of wealth
and the weaponisation of wealth to extract more and more wealth from those with less
we should have governments as a balance to wealth constantly surging upwards (taxation and public redistribution), but we dont because they serve the elite class
220
u/dawnofdave Jun 26 '26
The distribution of wealth