Do you support sustainability, social responsibility, tech ethics, or trust and safety? Congratulations, you’re an enemy of progress. That’s according to the venture capitalist Marc Andreessen.

  • eric@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    11 months ago

    It really depends on how you “get rid” of billionaires.

    If you do it in a way that ties a wealth limit to minimum wages, then we won’t have billionaires until they raise the income of the lower class to a point where the economic climate permits billionaires. Tying it to a fixed 1,000,000,000 monies would be a horribly flawed design because it would not be inflation proof and would vary across currencies. After all, a billionaire in dollar$ isn’t the same as a billionaire in ¥en.

    • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      11 months ago

      Within a socdem or capitalist society, neither of those solutions would be effective at eliminating billionaires or the inequality that comes with their existence. The only solution that could guarantee an elimination of billionaires is to seize their property and wealth (they can only have 1 house) and establish a socialist society.

      • eric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        Not sure how you got multiple solutions out of my comment. I was suggesting instituting a wealth tax (rather than an income tax), which is literally seizing their property and wealth, so I think we are in agreement here that such a solution would be the only way it works. However, I don’t think it should be a fixed monetary limit, rather one that changes based on economic indicators.