To think the world should have a 100% tax rate

[notanothernamechange24]

On anyone with assets or income over 1 billion pounds. Nobody needs to hoard money / wealth to that degree. There is no justification for it.
The world would be a far better place without billionaires let alone trillionaires.

I know it will never happen. But it should. AIBU?

They tried communism, it didn't work. There are still the rich and the poor mainly the politicians are the rich...

Love that idea!

or we should sell the opportunity to be king or queen of uk for a week. Occasions like Trooping the colour and state opening of parliament would cost £££s.

billionaires would be fighting each other to hand over a fortune

So company owners would launch on the stock market earlier at £750 million. Or split the shareholding between family members.

It wouldn't make any difference.

Could you explain how what was described fits in with the communist model?

Perhaps the first billion would be enough of an incentive? Nobody needs anything close to a billion pounds. Bloody ridiculous.

Nil motivation to do anything. None.
This is why the Stones left to go to France. They were taxed at 90%. No point in doing anything in the UK.
There comes a point when taxing someone so much is a massive negative. Tax needs to be sensible.

I’m sure China,Russia,Dubai,Dodgy S American countries will all comply

What is sensible about someone having over 1 billion in assets whilst 300 million people are starving. On their own each of the top 12 richest people could feed every single starving person without even noticing the cost. What is sensible about that?

Are you coming at this issue from the perspective someone on a low income with no savings @notanothernamechange24 ? Struggling?

My situation isn’t relevant! My disgust that we have over 300 million people starving in 2026 is!

You don’t think your situation is relevant to your perspective?

interesting

but it tells us that you are coming at this from a low income and precarious finances

They aren't going to give up, they'll just adjust where the money goes to ensure they don't go over a billion. Whether that's to shareholders, partners, in salary, other bonuses.

It’s why so many doctors and dentists work part time. No point over a certain amount because then you actually get paid less.

And so what ?

Anyone who sees the rampant inequality and lunacy of the current world economy is entitled to speak about it. Framing it as "envious poors" is the biggest part of the problem.

Not remotely relevant no.

And your assumptions are completely incorrect btw!

Well no they’re not and we both know that
but we will simply have to disagree as to the relevancy of personal circumstances to perspectives

If inflation is high and therefore interest rates high these wealthy individuals would never be able to keep their current wealth in line with inflation.

Seems a bit harsh.

Please enlighten me as to how one’s perspective on 300 million people starving unnecessarily changes dependent on one’s circumstances?

Is it that the wealthier you are the more you despise the people at the bottom?

Not as harsh as people starving to death!

1 billion pounds is still far more than any human ever could need. Even if their assets did deplete over time they could hardly claim poverty!

it is your suggestion for how to address the issue not the issue itself

Of course and I also think that someone like Jeff Bezos who could save millions of lives each year with hardly a dent in his assets is guilty of manslaughter.

I think there’s a slippery slope and a cut off point.

I agree people shouldn’t be starving of course, but stopping people accumulating wealth is not as simple as it sounds. You seem to be advocating for all surplus monies over a specific amount to legally be handed over to the government.

Countries have done this and it didn’t end well.

I propose to amend your idea and say that any surplus earnings of billionaires over a billion pounds would be directly re-distributed directly to the pockets of the poorest people. Cut the government out. This is not a serious suggstion of course.

As in the Rolling Stones- are they still producing music? You would hope that when they were more concerned with their creative output than incredible wealth being the end goal.

You could harmonise policy and practices with the EU to tackle the issue of loopholes. It's done with lots of things like Food standards, the Environmental commitments, data protection etc.

In a way it’s illogical that centimillionaires are still motivated to be billionaires, billionaires to become multi-billionaires, etc etc etc.

But it’s good that that drive exists I think. Humanity and technology advances for many reasons but one is that individuals are still driven to do the even bigger, even more ambitious, even more improbable venture.

Some might do it anyway even with a 100% tax, but many might not.

The vast majority of the people in the uk could save lives by buying only absolute basics and giving the rest to the poor in the developing world. Are they guilty of manslaughter too?