honestly at this point we should just compost them and cut our losses
this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2026
191 points (99.0% liked)
Progressive Politics
4586 readers
1141 users here now
Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)
(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Yeah. I hear the the desperate pleas of the liberal politicians when they finally realize that all the wine mom's are now Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries and spent the last few years learning to shoot a rifle and 3D print drone parts.
Taxes seem like something we asked you to try and you didn't. It's too late now.
.
Problem is then their wealth just gets passed down the line. You could keep going till there's nowhere for it to go, but people tend to yell at you when you bring up composting their kids (at least they did when I did it).
Grass looking for compost.... Not sus at all.
this isn't the medical industry. there is no big grass.
Well. Here in America, there absolutely is....
I've always thought it's crazy how municipalities can mandate your yard.
I'm interested in the debate between wealth taxes versus closing other loopholes (like using untaxed assets as loan collateral).
What are the arguments for both sides?
At this point? Literally just killing the mother fuckers (through the legal use of state punishment of course).
I really don't want my childrens children having to deal with this as we try to debate more liberal based policies that will inevitably be chipped away at again in the future. We can't leave the class structures in place that got us to this point again. If we do, we are absolutely failing future generations.
People talk about FDR like we need a "new new deal". Nah. Fuck that. We need a "burn it the fuck down and put the pedophile capitalist in a prison cell Deal"
The policies we need don't really have to do with taxation at all. And really what we need is beyond just policy changes too.
I suppose the main difference is philosophical, if it’s logical or fair to tax someone on unrealised gains. It problematic to me for a number of reasons. Mechanically, how and when do you assess that, and how can it be done fairly? Much more importantly though, is the political achievability, and I think you lose too many people off the bandwagon if you go down that route.
The same goal could be realised both more deterministically and in a way more palatable to the electorate by closing the loopholes you mention, thus forcing the realising of a gain (and a taxable event) as the only means of using one’s assets. In this way you don’t create a divisive wealth tax, rather you ensure that the existing taxes on capital are actually applied. This can be augmented by moving from a flat capital gains tax rate and instead taxing it progressively as income, another deterministic and more objectively fair approach.
I believe we could also implement a significantly higher inheritance tax rate, as it’s much easier to build consensus around punitive tax rates for wealth not personally generated. There are many people that will fight taxation of entrepreneurs, claiming they’ve earned their wealth. However, it’s much harder to argue that some rich guy’s descendants who did nothing more then be born deserve huge sums of money to do fuck all.
If you do both of those, you ensure that the very wealthy pay their fucking taxes, and that huge intergenerational wealth transfers instead become huge taxable events.
Mechanically, how and when do you assess that, and how can it be done fairly?
That was one of the objections to land value taxes before property tax assessments became commonplace.
To oversimplify: they can't hide the real-world things in which they store their wealth. So for example tax land, tax stock ownership, tax pollution. Legalize heists from unreported gold hoards.
Land value taxes. Other forms of wealth can be moved. There are too many different countries to move to and take wealth with you and hide it. Land can’t be moved.
Land value taxes also put a heavy cost on the most egregious forms of economic rent-seeking: collecting rent on people’s shelter. Collecting such heavy rent on mom & pop restaurants that they keep going out of business in a never-ending cycle of turnover. Destroying all kinds of small stores and cafes and restaurants which would otherwise build character in a community.
I've often been curious about a Harberger Tax for land use...
That’s pretty interesting. I don’t think it works right now though. A billionaire could buy up all the land in town and kick everyone out, then being the only voter just get rid of the tax after voting himself as the mayor (or just give himself back the tax money he paid).
At a federal level it may be interesting, but that would require scrapping everything and redoing the entire structure of the levels of government, since normally cities have the power to set their own property taxes, not other levels of government.
If you tax income then the ultra wealthy can find some financial construction to ensure that they have zero income. Of course, this is also true for wealth (see: the Gates Foundation), so maybe there is no good solution. 😅
If magazines like Forbes can make up a system to measure the wealth of the richest, then there is a way to tax them.
no good solution
As long as you make the conversion from "financial construction" to "personal benefit" a taxable event, I'm not sure I have a problem with that.
Yeah, especially considering that the ultra-wealthy don’t generally collect income. They use assets as collateral for low/zero interest loans and may even claim negative income as a result. We need a wealth tax and banking regulation that prevents the loan trick from working.
.
to do it quickly and im not sure anything else will work given how wealth has worked to reduce taxation so they could keep their wealth across generations no matter how incompetent they might become. one of the funny thing pleb boomers were sold on this idea of dying poor to enjoy what they had in life. they were sold their kids would have it as good or better than them with a society that would catch them if they fell. it was one of the ways wealth was vaccumed up from the lower levels.
Any individual with a net worth of more than 500 million should have their assets seized by any state that has a desire to survive. This will run them off, which is a win-win for the state, as they use infrastructure magnitudes more than normal people and give back less than nothing - being as they are laser-focused on sucking up every resource in their vicinity. This will give any such state a distinct competitive advantage over states that allow themselves to be exploited.
thats why you seize thier accounts, in those shady banks like swiss , and deustche.
Why stop there? Seize their assets and private property. No, really.
France has a wealth tax on global properties, from 800k upwards
They must've done a lot of interpretative dance and dildo throwing in their furry costumes.
And they voted harder of course
rick and mortys purge planet, at the end of the episode, where the alien girl and rick massacres the rich people in thier mansions.
LOL americans.
Gestapo kidnapping people on the streets and the boot forever pushing firmer in their neck.
And here's Bernie still wanting to tax the rich.