cross-posted from: https://midwest.social/post/30028880
Our policy initiatives and overall goal are slightly different than that of this sub, but we seek to have the largest tent that we can.
I believe incremental change is key, and although $12B may seem a ridiculously high wealth cap to a community arguing for a sub $1B cap, we hope you will look into our arguments.
A $12B cap has a much larger tent, as it only excludes 250 people in the world, and could be a first step in proving that wealth distribution is effective. By the numbers, people with $1B-$12B are not the driving issue of wealth inequality. If we can end the existence of major multi-billionaires all of humanity will be infinitely better off, whether they have a net worth of $1 or $1B
You must log in or register to comment.
I originally wrote a message specifically to this community, but it appears to be gone from the post for some reason. Ill try and rewrite it:
We are not looking to compete with this community, but believe incremental steps are key in moving towards a most equitable society
While we seek to cap wealth at $12B, as a means of eradicating the most problematic wealth accumulation, we hope that it also might serve as a means of proof-of-concept for wealth caps and redistribution at large. We also want to have the widest tent possible, and seek the assistance of the 1% in capping the wealth of the richest 250 people in the world for the sake of humanity and economic sustainability. We want to keep our movement and message as simple as possible. The current system is unsustainable, and it’s bad for everyone but 250 people. Even those who have hundreds of millions of dollars. If regular people have no buying power, their money will eventually go to the dogs just like the rest of us
I hope you will take the time to look into our arguments and consider joining us as well!
deleted by creator
