Should there be such a thing as a billionaire?

It's an objective fact. No one can "decide" to need a billion quid.

None of them did. They benefited from a system stacked in their favour by buying political influence. Imagining that they have been simply minding their own business and that an effort to undermine their power is the first violation of the natural order of things here is very foolish.

Nope. Full stop.

But yet by employing a housekeeper that millionaire is in fact circulating money into the hands of those who need it. If the millionaire did her own housework and stuffed her money in a mattress would that be any better? Something to think about!

agree! We can multitask to that degree at least.

You know I'm not really sure

Definitely not a lower tax rate than the working class pays, which is happening in your country right now
Link

Definitely not a "you-have-too-much-so-gimme-gimme-gimme tax"

Something in between and reasonable

Me, I'm almost paying 50% tax on my income - we a have tax bracket, sliding scale tax system here based on what you make a year, the less you make the less taxes you pay type thing, capped out at around 54% I think for the highest earners. Even though I'd rather pay less it seems to work out well enough, our quality of life is excellent

Sounds reasonable, tho 50% is too high. Lemme rehash my "flat tax" idea.

Set a flat tax rate of, say, 20% on all income above some lower boundary. Like "poverty line" + $5k or so. No exemptions, no deductions, no social engineering folderol. If the poverty line for a single person is $25k (example purposes only) then every dollar you make above $30k would be taxed at 20%. Period. No matter where those dollars came from: wages, tips, interest income, dividends, whatever. Corporate tax would work the same way. Companies would be taxed some flat percentage of their gross revenues. No exemptions or deductions. No avoiding it by having your home office in Notaxistan. If you operate any part of your business in the US, you're taxed at (for example) 10% of your gross revenue.

The Elizabeth Warren campaign and her "Wealth Tax" and high marginal tax rates has me thinking about this a lot lately. I almost started a similar thread here myself.

You know... being a "Billionaire" doesn't necessarily mean that you literally have a billion dollars sitting in some bank somewhere collecting interest. It's not hard to imagine a scenario where you've started a business that blazed a few trails and in the process of that growth, you've developed processes and quality management skills that created value... and all of a sudden, someone called you a "billionaire." You go check your bank account and the assets of your company to make sure and while I'm sure it's substantial, it's no where near a billion dollars. That's because the wealth you've created is tied up in the company you own. If you sold it and walked away from everything, it might add up over a billion or somewhere close it, but it's not liquid cash at the moment. I don't know if it's fair saying someone like that shouldn't exist or he/she shouldn't own what they own.

The idea of a wealth tax is interesting. The older I get, the more I realize that the accumulation of great shares of money in only a few places is not a good thing for a representative democracy. The more wealth/money exchanging hands throughout all sectors of our society, the better. So where could/should government come in? I think the tax code works best when it encourages people to take risks with their wealth to employ more people or pay higher wages, etc. Start a new business, pay out some bonuses, give raises buy capital equipment... Let's make that easy... or downright enticing for people who take risks with large sums of money that will employ people and help them prosper. I think there's a way that high marginal tax rates and a wealth tax can encourage those sort of things and help prevent the rich kids on the block from taking their "ball" and go home so to speak. I'm sure we won't get it right the first time or two it's tried but if it's kept up it can work.

Read the precise wording again.

Agreed, the billionaire threshold is totally arbitrary but the point in question is whether there's a genuine justification for a system which allows resources (as embodied by money) to be so focused on single individuals at the expense of others.

So you're okay as long as they give to people who you deem worthy?

Overall, I don't think it stopped being a thing -- there are still plenty of billionaire philanthropists -- but it's not like the 19th-century model was all that great. Then as now, there was an element of "let's generate good PR by giving away a fraction of what we got by exploiting the work of others."

There were arguments that towns should reject Carnegie money for libraries on the grounds that, if it weren't for the massive inequalities that created his fortune, citizens would be able to buy good things for their own communities without relying on the largesse of the robber baron class. And Carnegie, though flawed, was one of the best of the lot.

(Of course, there were also communities that didn't want Carnegie money because they were terrified that the libraries would have to admit Negroes, but that's a whole different discussion.)

Billionaires are an inevitable result of unconstrained capitalism, where one of the biggest factors influencing how much money you can accumulate is how much money you already had.

Simply outright banning billionaires from having that much money would be a very bad idea as it would lead to adverse side effects. That said, stronger progressive taxes should definitely be in place for much the same reason as we (in theory) don't let any one company accumulate too much power.

To this end then I assume you have no problem with the concept of kings, queens, and hereditary dynasties?

It hasn't

I've unfortunately been to several hospitals recently due to various family members/friends being unwell and the donor lists there are a sight to behold

It hasn’t stopped, the Koch brothers donate to PBS. There are other examples as well.

Paul McCartney

The generation of a billion dollars in personal wealth depends on countless social, government, and economic-systemic inputs, far and beyond what any individual can control. In other words, nobody "makes" a billion dollars; they only happen upon it.

Most billionaire wealth is the result of rent-seeking and luck, not direct labor inputs.

So no, there "shouldn't" be any billionaires, morally speaking.

Nevertheless, much like "The One" is the result of the Matrix being not-quite-balanced, so are billionaires an inevitable result of our capitalist system. If they are highly taxed to repay the system and the people that created them, it's fair enough.

(Of course, there were also communities that didn't want Carnegie money because they were terrified that the libraries would have to admit Negroes, but that's a whole different discussion.)

damn white people were stupid back then! Not admitting blacks? Those floors aren't going to sweep themselves!

Seriously, I heard on NPR today that the author of "The Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman" just died at age 96. In a previously recorded interview (duh) he said when he was younger he spent a lot of time at the library and there weren't many books by or for blacks. So he decided to give writing a try! Obviously it ended up working out well for him.
Side note a movie about Harriet Tubman is coming out soon for those of you into historical biography movies. She used to go into a trance like state from time-to-time and she claimed god gave her guidance on how to continue with her underground railroad work during these periods. But she was hit in the head with a two pound weight of some sort and suffered a severe head injury, so her trance like states were actually seizures - so who knows?

Sorry to hear about your family and friends troubles.

Thank you. Fortunately nothing too serious

nobody "earns" a billion dollars.
has it redirected to them, skimmed it off of the top, sure... but "earned"?

That I disagree with. We should be like Sweden and everyone’s tax records should be publicly available as sunshine is the best disinfectant and those are public records. That won’t show people wealth but will show income as well as taxes paid so the general public as well as policy institute can advise the public with facts.

I saw your previous post but still wanted to tender my hopes that all turns out well for your family and friends IRL.

If you own an asset and do a hell of a lot of hard work to make that asset worth something according to the market? Yes, I’d say you earned it and so did the investors who pushed your stock price up so high.

Remember
You didn’t build that.

He specifically was talking about roads.

Sorry to hear that bud.

Have you owned a business? Have you worked a business up from nothing to a point where it makes a decent amount of money? I have done that. I have done it a couple of times. There is a certain amount of effort I can put in and get a return on. However, that is a finite amount and eventually my ability to make my business run and profit caps at a very low amount in comparison to a billion, million, or even thousands of dollars. If I am doing everything myself and not using anyone else's work i don't get very far. That is especially true when I consider that a lot of the tools I would use to increase my own ability to do work are often created and supplied by other people.

There is no way a billionaire did it by themselves or even close to by themselves. Not even a millionaire does it by themselves.

If I went out and stumbled across a billion dollars, like physically a billion dollars, I could not even carry it to the bank or protect it by myself.

I think everyone involved in building this would love to be able to deny it!