Yes.
this post was submitted on 17 May 2026
480 points (96.5% liked)
Progressive Politics
4619 readers
775 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
No. I never agree with anyone using engagement bait titles.
Only 5%? Mine is approaching 30% and I can't afford shit.
Also sending out checks is fucking stupid. Just lower our taxes.
It's 5% of wealth, not income. But still, anything short of 100% will not stop the parasites. But its a nice gesture, if nothing else
But its a nice gesture, if nothing else
Not particularly. 5% is nothing to them.
It's so crazy to me that people eat stuff like this up. Pages like this make BANK slapping some text on a bunch of image while adding absolutely nothing to the conversation.
Everything they make exists not to make a difference but to drive page views to their stupid accounts. It's so, so transparent.
And in this house, we hate all ads
I think 99% of people agree with this - that Bernie Sanders wants to do it. Do they support it, though?
5%?! How about 50%, for starters.
So your wealth is halved every year?
No, it should be 10% at least.
We could tax a billionaire 95% of their wealth, and they would still have more money than you or I could reasonably spend in a lifetime.
Oh yeah, I'm a big proponent of no more billionaires. But it appears to a lot of average people smaller amounts are more palpable because they think they'll ever be that rich.
No. It doesn't go far enough. After a certain point, both personal and corporate wealth should be 100% taxed, with loopholes closed and massive penalties imposed on any who previously exploited them. Government critters should solely live on salaries, unable to buy or sell stocks, nor receive 'gifts'.
I have the same amount of power to make this happen as Bernie Sanders has.
load more comments
(4 replies)
I don't know.. why is medical care so expensive in the first place? Why are teachers wages so low? Why is there such a huge wealth disparity?
Seems like these are systematic problems which need to be solved with a full system restructuring rather than throwing money at it. Not to dunk on Bernie, but If I were American, I'd be hoping for more concrete solutions.
5% tax sounds nice (imo, its no where near nice enough lol) but what are we taxing here exactly? Billionaires don't actually have any money. There's a systematic problem to solve right there.. how can people be filthy rich, yet have no actual money to tax?
Like this, a very 'American idea' to me is 'student loan forgiveness'. You borrow money from a bank (for profit institution), you pay it to get educated at a university (for profit institution) and get the loan forgiven by the government (tax payers). Systematic problem. Just make universities public and they get funded by the tax payers directly.
Feels like a band aid on a dismembered limb imo..
Would you rather bleed to death?
I get your misgivings but... Changing it for the better has gotta start somewhere.
Even this idea is way too "progressive" to have any chance of coming to pass
load more comments
(3 replies)
Polish government decided to send check to all parents as a way to promote having kids.
You know what happened? All the products needed by young kids suddenly rose in price. Sending checks to americans will do the same - all necessities will just become expensive exactly by amount of money they got.
Want to change the world? Tax the debt machine (5 or 10% of every transaction involving stocks and obligations, including using them as a loan security) and treat companies like people (as in - tax them on income, not on profit).
It's supply and demand, if your raise the demand of course the products cost more. What did they expect?
If supply is, for example, 10.000 units a day, and demand rises from 5.000 to 8.000, there is no reason why the price should increase, other than corporate greed.
This isn't what was happening. Supply was 10k, and demand was 10k. They gave out money to people, and supply stayed 10k. Of course prices increases under these conditions.
Things only cost more if the people pay more. With spending discipline, people could have had actually more. Most things are industrially produced. Supply likely was no bottleneck and the increased demand could have been matched.
The implication is that people already own everything that they can buy. Wage increases only increase inflation. Fighting for higher wages only increases the prices.
There was no increase to amount of kids conceived after the "financial help" was redistributed. Prices of child necessities grew after the funding was passed, before first money reached the parents.
And we are surprised? That exactly how the market works.
And, as I said, this will exactly happen in the USA - they will give handouts, necessities will grow and all the handout money will just pass back to billionaires with interest.
That exactly what would happen. I agree.
The fact they had to ask says a lot.
Tax them how?
It’s complicated but depending on how they’re taxed you might not get shit out of them.
IMHO it's a global problem and American exceptionalism won't solve it.
Billionaires in general need to cease to exist. Bloodshed is coming mark my words.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›