• Dagwood222@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Anyone who owns a house is a millionaire.

    So we’ve got a tiny number of billionaires in charge.

    An ever dwindling number of millionaires desperately holding onto their small privilege

    An ever growing number of working poor who need two paychecks to live

    Sounds like Tsarist Russia, with no single royal family to execute.

    • aesthelete@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Anyone who owns a house is a millionaire.

      So we’ve got a tiny number of billionaires in charge.

      An ever dwindling number of millionaires desperately holding onto their small privilege

      I mean this simply cannot be true.

      If everyone who owns a house is a millionaire, then in order for the “number of millionaires” to be “ever dwindling” we would need not only a housing shortage, but an eroding quantity of housing or a drastic drop in home ownership rates. Neither is happening. The home ownership rate in 2024 is 65.8% according to this site: https://www.simplyinsurance.com/how-many-homeowners-in-the-us/ which puts us at a much improved rate of ownership from when the housing crash happened in 2008, when we were running somewhere in the low 60s.

      So not everyone who owns a house is a millionaire, or millionaires numbers aren’t dwindling. It simply cannot be the case that what you’re saying here is all true.

    • vithigar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Anyone? There are lots of houses worth less than $1,000,000. Sure, by the time a mortgage is paid off and you fully own the house yourself a person should also have some savings, but I certainly wouldn’t expect that to be universal.

      • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        My house is now worth a bit over $350,000. And although that is less then $1,000,000 I bought it at $185,000 (and had to use every penny saved to get a down payment) just a decade ago. Even in my small rural town I currently could not afford to buy the house I live in, I doubt this will improve in time.

        I might not be a millionaire, but I would guess I am now in a smaller class of people that owns where they sleep. And if the market keeps doing whats its doing I might be a millionaire in time (this is not overall a good thing).

        • tacosplease@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          Plus the bank owns any house with a mortgage. It’s not your house until it’s paid off. Can’t be a millionaire with $400,000 in assets and $375,000 in debt.

          • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            I am not sure you understand how a mortgage works. Why would I have $375,000 on a mortgage for a house I bought for $185,000 over a decade ago?

            The bank “owns” only what is owning on the mortgage with the property and buildings on it as collateral. Even if I stopped paying all together (for some reason) the bank does not want the house, they want the money and will force a sale though foreclosure.

            The issue is that we now have two “classes” of non rich people, those that spend money on rent (a cost without equity) and those like me ether old enough or lucky enough to have a mortgage where the money we spend on a mortgage (reducing that debit) is not wasted and the value of our homes keeps going up.

  • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    We have to scare the rich. Organize, agitate, break shit, etc. They have been too successful at dividing us along arbitrary lines. No war but class war. Fight back.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Tax.

    Tax them like there is no tomorrow.

    Billionaires should simply not exist. Put a cap on total net worth and if you pass that, income tax goes to 100. If your networth goes up anyway because of stocks or whatever, tax that too. Tax stocks, homes, boats, etc.

    Enormous wealth should be like the speed of light. The closer you get there, the heavier it becomes to stay there, you need to spend more and more energy to get less and less higher.

    This should not be a crazy idea.

    • TammyTobacco@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I’m a proponent to legalize murder of anyone with a net worth of $1 bn or more. It would make the rich have to make some decisions.

        • pinkystew@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          they’re so nice, so surely everybody else is too

          This right here.

          I think many poor people do not realize how deliberately cruel the rich are being. They cannot imagine someone looking at a whiteboard planning debilitating poverty and misery for millions of people. They think that the situation is unfortunate and unavoidable somehow, and not deliberately made.

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Bullshit

        Stop the calls for killing the rich. Don’t blame people for playing the game, just change the rules. Tax the rich for all they have until everyone lives in a tops 1-5 ratio of networth. All of the sudden, poverty gone, we can do universal healthcare easily, government will have boat loads for anything to make our lives better

      • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’d rather not become the monsters just to get rid of the monsters.

      • BigBenis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        This violence-against-the-owning class rhetoric is going too far. Killing other humans is never justified. Tax them into oblivion and make them work for a living like the rest of us. There’s a massive difference between having disdain for billionaires and wanting to kill them.

        • jaek@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          Killing other humans is often justified. For instance, it would be completely justified to kill someone who was in the process of shooting up a school.

          In the same way, billionaires are guilty of causing the deaths of millions of people through their hoarding of necessities. Killing the billionaires would allow this wealth to be redistributed, saving potentially millions of lives.

          • BigBenis@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            I think the difference is that a school shooter is in the middle of a violent act and is an immediate threat to the lives of anybody around them. Usually the only way to put an end to the harm they’re causing is to meet that violence with the same level of violence. It’s not a just act, it’s a tragedy, but it’s ultimately necessary to prevent further injustice.

            Hoarding an incomprehensible amount of resources and lobbying for a system is easier to exploit is amoral and causes harm to our society but it is not a violent act and is not an immediate threat to anybody’s life.

            These memes spreading violent rhetoric against a class of people this community is at odds with is starting to feel like other corners of the internet that I don’t want to be involved in.

          • BigBenis@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            I’d wager we have a much better shot at passing legislation for a billionaire tax than legalizing murder.

      • theherk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I have been saying something slightly similar, but rather that laws should no longer protect them.

    • abracaDavid@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Billionaires have such a heavy say in our government that it will never go that way unless it’s forced.

    • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      gilded age

      Reforming capitalism will only delay end stage, not prevent it.

      Imagine getting something like the early 20th century labor movement going these days. Seems impossible right? We we did do it once and guess what, we are back again. What was the point of spilling all that blood sweat and tears if we just go right back to where we started? We wasted those lives lost and ruined because we thought capitalism could be salvaged. It is not salvageable.

      • aesthelete@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        We we did do it once and guess what, we are back again. What was the point of spilling all that blood sweat and tears if we just go right back to where we started?

        30 years of relative prosperity?

        Also, I don’t understand how you think we’d be able to abolish capitalism without much more blood, sweat, and tears than would be spent building a labor movement. I also think that a strong labor movement would be a necessary prerequisite to abolishing capitalism. I don’t see how you build a movement to abolish capitalism with millions of isolated, fractured consumers. By magic? Will AI or crypto solve this? 😄

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Reforming capitalism will only delay the end stage, not prevent it

        Oh boy oh boy do I need a <citation required> for this bold, completely unsustained and dumb response

  • Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Profits shouldn’t exist. They should be required to put that money back into the company and take a salary for themselves. Idk how this works with shareholders but they can get fucked for all I care at this point.

    • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Companies need shareholders to get off the ground, and you don’t have to be rich to be a shareholder. That’s the whole idea… otherwise only the mega rich have the capital to start businesses.

      Paying C-suites this much is just idiotic though. I own a few stocks, and seeing some of the companies pay executives and upper management so much to feud and slowly destroy companies makes me sick. It is not what anyone sane wants unless they’re parasitic daytraders or drinking the corporate kool-aid.

      Greedy capitalism is the problem, but it’s also a culture problem, I think.

    • huquad@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      The way you fix this is with higher, and enforced, corporate taxes. If the corporation doesn’t keep the money anyways, they flow it back in.

    • psvrh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      We used to have progressive income taxes that did this.

      Reagan, Thatcher and their ilk pulled them because “trickle down, a rising tide lifts all boats, thousand points of light, blah blah blah”

      • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        A rising tide lifts all boats has always struck me as a strange metaphor for them to use. To me that conjures up thoughts of welfare, UBI, irreducible minimums, safety nets, etc. It seems like a great metaphor for the opposite of what they’re using it for.

  • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    There’s like 600k people dying of cancer at any given time, and seperately theres only like 800 billionaires who are probably somewhat directly responsible for their cancer and lack of access to medical care. If I had a bucket list bc I was dying of cancer, I know what would be on it.

  • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Weird, employment is up right near full employment, real wages are up, and quality of life has never been higher by any metric.

    Is this just about tech layoffs due to overtraining the workforce and excess supply? Neat.

    • TheOgreChef@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      They definitely notice, why do you think they’re pushing the birth rate and great replacement theory BS so damn hard? They want everyone young, broke and uneducated so they can keep the grift going.

      • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        They’d care because if the masses are too poor to afford their products, that’s actually a threat to their power.

        • Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          They would, then, but that is not now. Right now they are concerned with us not having enough children, because capitalism requires population growth, and, as places become richer, they have fewer children. The most industrialized places are in decline, outside of immigration. So this is where you see the consternation of the rich and powerful.

  • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I wish it was a Gilded Age. At least Rockefeller and Vanderbilt had some fucking taste.

    All of this will happen before, and all of it will happen again. Except uglier and dumber.