"Billinaires shouldn't exist." Do you agree with Bernie? (1 Viewer)

[slick]

People should have the freedom to succeed and become rich.

Becoming rich is the incentive that drives investment, productivity, and innovation. No innovation ever came out of socialist countries.

I think 700,000,000 is enough success for anyone. 10 billion or more is a little obscene!

 

[VanceMack]

500 million


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So when they earn 500 million they should just shut down their operations...right?

 

[jaypatriot]

(Let's pretend everything is spelled correctly in the title.)

If Bernie said that, then he is so full of c**p he doesn't deserve to live in a capitalist country.
He would like to be a billionaire, but his bu**sh*t books could not make him enough money.
But he is still a millionaire with three homes without ever having to hold down a full time job.
Not bad for a Socialist.

 

[Odysseus]

Is a billionaire 100 times a better person than someone with 10 million?

 

[jimbo]

The top 10% of wealthy Americans own 70% of America's wealth.

This is the USA. The land of opportunity. That list is constantly changing. There's no reason you can't be part of it.

 

[Oborosen]

(Let's pretend everything is spelled correctly in the title.)

It's funny how Bernie used to be all about sticking it to the millionaires and billionaires. That was until he realized that he himself was a millionaire and had to change his tune.

 

[Felis Leo]

I don't think it should be impossible to be a billionaire, but I don't see the point of hoarding this much money. It just seems unhealthy to me to be hoarding this much money.

Do most billionaires "hoard" their money, distraff? From what I understand, most billionaires' wealth is not made up of cash locked in a vault, but in investments. Warren Buffet and Jeff Bezos's wealth seems to be mainly made up of ownership of stock in healthy businesses. If their investments do not succeed ( i.e., the businesses do not succeed) their wealth dissipates.

 

[iguanaman]

Let me know when that happens. :roll:

Don't worry you'll know..

 

[Hatuey]

Re: "Billinaires shouldn't exist." Do you agree with Bernie?

What amount should be the limit?

The limit should be when you are able to self finance an election at the rate of 7 million a day. If you've got that much money to burn on a fools errand, you probably don't pay enough in taxes.

Я Баба Яга [emoji328]

 

[Michael Johnson]

Generational wealth is what everyone should strive for. If one starts a family and has absolutely nothing to pass down to their progeny they've failed.

 

[Michael Johnson]

Re: "Billinaires shouldn't exist." Do you agree with Bernie?

The limit should be when you are able to self finance an election at the rate of 7 million a day. If you've got that much money to burn on a fools errand, you probably don't pay enough in taxes.

Я Баба Яга [emoji328]

They money is rightfully his that he worked hard for. The way he spends his own money has no impact on your life. Your post reeks of jealousy.

Besides, your party removed fair restrictions for him just to have a desperate shot to even face Trump. LOL!

 

[cpwill]

Why?..

Because Emotions > Reason

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[cpwill]

Re: "Billinaires shouldn't exist." Do you agree with Bernie?

Do most billionaires "hoard" their money, distraff? From what I understand, most billionaires' wealth is not made up of cash locked in a vault, but in investments. Warren Buffet and Jeff Bezos's wealth seems to be mainly made up of ownership of stock in healthy businesses. If their investments do not succeed ( i.e., the businesses do not succeed) their wealth dissipates.

I have noticed this as well. There seems to be some kind of implicit belief that the wealthy keep it all in giant money silos, a'la Scrooge McDuck.

 

[rickc]

Re: "Billinaires shouldn't exist." Do you agree with Bernie?

Its the tax.code!

 

[distraff]

Do most billionaires "hoard" their money, distraff? From what I understand, most billionaires' wealth is not made up of cash locked in a vault, but in investments. Warren Buffet and Jeff Bezos's wealth seems to be mainly made up of ownership of stock in healthy businesses. If their investments do not succeed ( i.e., the businesses do not succeed) their wealth dissipates.

Money is money whether it is invested or not. Just because your money is being invested instead of being in a locked vault doesn't mean you aren't hoarding money. It is very unlikely their wealth will dissipate because enough money is in diversified investments, that they are virtually guaranteed to remain billionaires for life. With the average rate of increase of the stock market, these diversified investments will likely gain value much faster than they will ever spend it on themselves.

The most rational reason to have money is for happiness and well-being. I believe there is a principle of diminishing returns as you earn more money. When you go from $0 to $10,000, you can now afford food, drink, and some clothes and dramatically increases your quality of life. $10,000 to $20,000 now makes cheap shelter affordable, but the difference in happiness isn't as dramatic. But once you start earning over $100,000 per year, your basic healthcare and necessities all become affordable, and any further increase doesn't really impact your actual happiness that much in the long-term.

Many billionaires hoard their money even when their quality of life is virtually the same with 50 billion as with 100 million, because that money becomes a status symbol, a measure of achievement, and a goal to strive for. Some of them grew up poor, and have this insatiable desire for status and money, that they were previously deprived of. It would be healthier for billionaires to find other ways of feeling good about themselves, and give their employees a raise, lower prices for consumers, or give more to charity, since a lack of money is a big problem for most people.

 

[cpwill]

It's too much power for one person to have imo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1. You are well overinflating their "power".

2. However, wealth and the resulting ability to influence others in a market economy generally comes directly from the decision of others that you have already influenced their lives for good.

3. If no one should have the power associated with a net worth of a billion dollars, why should anyone have the far greater power of a President, Director of the FBI, or Governor? If your standard is "no man should have the kind of ability to influence others associated with the capability to buy a lot of television advertising by liquidating parts of their net worth", you are going to need to radically shrink the size and scope of government well below the ability even to defend our basic rights.


For those who believe our system of Government, with it's electoral colleges and filibusters, isn't democratic (small d) enough... the market is the most Democratic filtering mechanism that we have. There have been a lot of different means by which various civilizations have structured the accumulation of wealth. "How well do others think that you serve them" strikes me as a far better such means than the others I've heard about.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[Josie]

Because Emotions > Reason

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

Precisely.

 

[Mongidig]

Should freeloaders exist?

You reap what you sow!

 

[haymarket]

I have no problem with a person having any amount of money providing
1- it is earned both legally and ethically
2- they pay their fair share to the government of our country and state

As Warren Buffet famously is said to have observed - there is something wrong with our system when the secretary and the billionaire pay the same rate of taxes. Or even worse - the secretary pays a higher rate than the billionaire.

 

[Mongidig]

I have no problem with a person having any amount of money providing
1- it is earned both legally and ethically
2- they pay their fair share to the government of our country and state

As Warren Buffet famously is said to have observed - there is something wrong with our system when the secretary and the billionaire pay the same rate of taxes. Or even worse - the secretary pays a higher rate than the billionaire.

I'd guess that the secretary pretty much always pays a higher rate.

 

[americanwoman]

They have a right to exist but it is kind of sad they do when they could do so much more than they do now to help out others.

Of course, I have to admit though I am jealous. I'd love to have that kind of security that I could just lay on a beach, or a luxury yacht, and not have to worry about what would happen if I had a health emergency, how my kid is going to go to a good college, or any other real life situation billionaires don't even have to think about. I would like to think that I'm a better person and wouldn't have that much money because I'd be giving it away and paying my workers awesome wages with good benefits but who knows probably at some point those billionaires thought that too.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Yes, here's a visual that can help you understand the scale of what a billion dollars actually is.

Visual Representation of a Million Vs a Billion Dollars w/ Rice

Yep, $1B is 1000 times as much as $1M. Just as $1M is 1000 times as much as $1K and $1K is 1000 times as much as $1.

One would likely not consider a business to be bad (evil or too greedy) if it generated an annual net profit of $7.5K per employee and hired 100 employees, making a profit of $750K/year. One would likely not see that business as being bad (evil or too greedy) if it succeeded in growing to 1000 employees, thus making $7.5M/year, yet if that business grows to 2M employees making $14B annually it then somehow becomes bad (evil or too greedy) because it is then Walmart.

 

[Herkamer63]

You know what shouldn't exist? The barbaric practice and ritual of killing babies in or out of the womb 'cause FEELINGS.

In any case, if someone becomes a billionaire or just a millionaire, it's because they, typically, put out a great product or service that help people benefit (or stuff they simply enjoy). I'm beginning to believe more and more each day that Crazy Bernie's assertion of punishing rich people is his way of making them poorer while enriching himself. He was under criminal investigation for bank fraud. What's interesting, unless if I simply missed it, is we haven't heard about the results of that investigation. Also he well under-payed on his taxes a few years ago, and probably has for decades (and probably even today). Lastly, he HIMSELF is a millionaire. He made millions off his book he released about a year ago or so, his wife was a president of a college, was a mayor in Vermont, and he has been in Congress for decades. And it also makes me wonder if back in 2016 the Clintons paid him off and that's the reason why he owns 3 HOMES and lost in that election cycle.

This man is an opportunist, he can't relate to anyone on here, and, I believe, he's GREEDY. But his supporters don't have a problem with him being a millionaire like Dommberg's supporters don't have one with him being a billionaire. So unless if there is something that IS wrong, like someone breaking multiple laws and ruining people's lives, billionaires should be allowed to exist.

 

[Josie]

Enough to start a business or invest in one while leaving plenty for your kids but not an obscene enough amount to buy governments


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What happens to any money earned beyond $500 million?

 

[American]

Do you have proof or this?

China uses capitalist principles to achieve innovation in their county, and so does Russia. Without incentive, there will be no innovation. It's just risk without reward, and no one will do it.