this post was submitted on 09 Jun 2026
440 points (99.8% liked)

Progressive Politics

4743 readers
242 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)
[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world -2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

That may disincentivize entrepreneur immigrants like Elon Musk.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

illegal immigrant elon musk and KIMBALL MUSK.

[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago

Illegal or not, he pays his taxes

[–] Pat_Riot@lemmy.today 4 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

No, they should be exterminated and their assets seized, liquidated and used to start UBI.

[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

Just block them from reentering the US or doing any business, owning property or investing in the US until they pay taxes.

[–] Pat_Riot@lemmy.today 1 points 3 weeks ago

No. They have already done too much damage. Expulsion isn't good enough. They need to be made an example of. We need to make it scary to be greedy.

[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world -2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

They would simply take their investments abroad.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

That would end businesses being owned by citizens.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

No, allowing oligarchs to take our capital with them when they flee overseas to avoid paying taxes ends businesses being owned by citizens

[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Would you rather the wealth be owned by the government?

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Than taken overseas by fleeing oligarchs? Yes, obviously. What are you doing in this com?

[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Agreed but there are better options than government ownership

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Lol, you were literally saying that we can't raise tax then because they'll leave, you don't fucking agree you lying slug, you literally do think those assets are best off being clutched too by oligarchs

[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Nope. I'm just being honest. Socialism cannot be implemented at the national level. There's a reason communists are internationalists.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah man, communists definitely ring their hands about how we can't seize assets from billionaires because the government is worse, definitely

[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Depends on the type. I'm a market socialist. Leninism isn't good enough.

[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] Pat_Riot@lemmy.today 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

But it's a start and the money would be moving again.

[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] Pat_Riot@lemmy.today 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

How long will the money stay moving? Well if we make it dangerous to hoard wealth then the money will basically always keep moving.

How long will the initial slush fund last? Probably just long enough to get society working for itself. It's not like it's the only change that would have to happen. A whole lot of corruption and waste will have to be eliminated,to start with, which will be easier with there being no billionaires left to buy politicians.

[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

No, if we make it dangerous to hoard wealth, then there will be no incentive to create wealth.

Also, you don't need to be a billionaire to buy politicians. Multi millionaires can very well afford to do it as well.

[–] Pat_Riot@lemmy.today 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Cool, let's do nothing and continue on this path then. You sound just like all the other temporarily embarrassed millionaires out there to *get yours and fuck everyone else *. Your defense of capitalistic greed is disgusting. You are part of the problem.

[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Lol no shot. I'm a socialist myself. I just don't think billionaires are the enemy. Hate the game, not the player. We need systemic change, not temporary measures.

[–] Pat_Riot@lemmy.today 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The ultrarich players are ones making the rules, and surprise, the rules allow them to shut out the majority so they can have the most. Taxing them is no longer enough. At this point they need to be punished for being what they are and eliminated. Then real rules and enforcement need to be put in place to make things fair and equitable to everyone. That will never happen as long as the rich are making the rules. Period. Extreme greed must be made deadly or others will choose the path of hoarding wealth and they will deliberately cause suffering to do so just as all their kind do and have done.

[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Disagreed. If the ultra rich made the rules, we wouldn't have elections. The rules definitely don't allow to shut out the majority afaik. The choice to hoard wealth itself must be removed.