this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2024
210 points (100.0% liked)

YUROP

4 readers
1 users here now

A laid back community for good news, pictures and general discussions among people living in Europe.

Other European communities

Other casual communities:

Language communities

Cities

Countries

founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
210
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by 7eter@feddit.org to c/yurop@lemm.ee
 

We need taxes for all - also the super-rich.

"Tax the rich" is an official EU petition. The EU Parliament has to deal with it when successful.

7 EU countries must reach the quorum. And in total 1M Votes are needed. Check yours in the chart and share, cross post etc.!

The petition calls for the introduction of a wealth tax on very large fortunes. Sign the petition here

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] atro_city@fedia.io 7 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Europeans don't care. they just want to complain.

P.S signed

[–] 7eter@feddit.org 9 points 2 months ago

i believe they might not know that this is important and will affect folks who earn around 1000€ passively from interests... per day ^^

[–] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Maybe they don't hate the rich?

[–] 7eter@feddit.org 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The question is: Why should I care?

[–] 7eter@feddit.org 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

is it fair being born with wealth that pays you a daily interest that others work for a whole month?

[–] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

If this wealth was legitimately earned by your parents? Yes it is fair. Supporting your children is your sacred right.

[–] 7eter@feddit.org 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Please explain how one legitimately earned 10 Million.

[–] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Usually by starting a company that produced valuable goods and services benefitting everyone and profiting off of it.

You can also gamble but thats by definition a losing game

[–] 7eter@feddit.org 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

sounds quiet unusual to be honest

[–] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

sounds quiet unusual to be honest

I think it's the most common road to be a millionaire.

Microsoft - Bill Gates Amazon - Jeff Bezos Berkshire Hathaway - Warren Buffet CDProjekt - Adam Kiciński, Marcin Iwiński (They started from absolute nothing, bazar stand with bootleg software) TOYOTA - Akio Toyoda, branched out from family buisness in textile industry

Literally every single successful business made it's founder a fortune

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)
  • Microsoft: monopolist founded with a "small loan"
  • Amazon: monopolist founded with a "small loan"
  • Berkshire Hathaway - founded by a congressman's son with access to wealth and education
  • CDProjekt, wow an outlier!
  • TOYOTA - generational wealth

Literally every single successful business made it's founder a fortune

LMFAO "the winners won". Any other tautologies you want to spout? "The losers lost" maybe?

[–] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Even if you had access to the capital, you'd most likely fail - because running a business is hard

For every Bill Gates or Bezos there are dozens if not hundreds who sunk the entire initial investment.

You hate survivors for some reason.

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 3 points 2 months ago

Invests money they don't own at no risk

Allowed to do so as many times as necessary until success

Has access to advisors, education, can hire entire teams out of the gate

"I am just like you"

[–] 7eter@feddit.org 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

"valuable goods ... benefiting everyone" not on the cost of others is what's lacking here

[–] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

valuable goods ... benefiting everyone

If other people are buying what you produce, in almost every case you produce something valuable, and a person who buys from you benefits.

There are exceptions - drugs, weapons, slot machines ect.

But basically everything you see around yourself that was made by man, was produced by a successful business, and bought by somone who needed it.

[–] 7eter@feddit.org 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

you missed something when citing me

not on the cost of others

[–] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

not on the cost of others

It's not on the cost of others, its a fair exchange. Both sides benefit

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And the people in the middle? Sure, the people exploited for the production of those goods benefited a lot. The child forced to harvest coffee and chocolate really enjoyed the transaction.

[–] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The child forced to harvest coffee

It's fault of their governments

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Really? The western companies exploiting them aren't to blame? The western companies that pay off people to look the other way? The western companies that organise military coups? The western companies that murder opposition? The western companies that send their trash to the country to destroy the market there?

[–] hessenjunge@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 months ago

You need to stop feeding the trolls.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Hey ho I have a paper for you

We demonstrate that chance alone, combined with the deterministic effects of compounding returns, can lead to unlimited concentration of wealth, such that the percentage of all wealth owned by a few entrepreneurs eventually approaches 100%.

...note no skill required. Conversely, hustling won't get you there.

We show that a tax on large inherited fortunes, applied to a small portion of the most fortunate in the population, can efficiently arrest the concentration of wealth at intermediate levels.

So we don't even have to hit millionaire kids. Inheriting 5-10 million a head is fine, systemically speaking. And if you think that your kids are better off with more money I sincerely feel sorry for you.

[–] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

...note no skill required. Conversely, hustling won't get you there.

You didn't read that paper. From fast skimming I can clearly see that their simplified model didn't check for impact of skill at all.

It says nothing about real world except there's a wealth concentrating factor of being ahead. Other factors are ignored

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 8 points 2 months ago

This result is robust to inclusion of realities such as differing skill among entrepreneurs.

The key thing is that this paper looks at generational wealth accumulation. Even if families which consistently churn out stellar business people were in any way common (data says otherwise) that effect is still completely overwritten by already being ahead. As a billionaire kid, the extent of business skill you need to have to not lose everything is to hire people who have business skill and then slurp Caipirinhas on your yacht from your ample, ample dividends. And if you lose everything, well, you're losing it, on aggregate, to other billionaires, so wealth concentration still proceeds.

[–] MacStache@programming.dev 1 points 2 months ago

It's not that I don't care, I just haven't even heard about this until now.