you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

You say that like we're not trying to push politicians for walkable cities and healthcare and stock market reforms. Guess who hates all that stuff?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago* (3 children)

    Because they are not gonna hate losing their ownership of the companies even more? Like it's still significantly easier to push for reforms than completely toppling the economic system.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (2 children)

    I don't think we need to topple the system to make progress. But they can't keep that wealth and power if we intend to live in a better world. Letting rich people write policy is a bit like letting the fox guard the henhouse. I'm not saying off with their heads, but we should set a practical cap on how much one person can own and at a minimum overturn Citizens United.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (1 child)

    I am skeptical about a cap, but the rest is definitely true. Letting them have too much influence on policy is the issue.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Unless you generally make it difficult to keep a fortune at some largest possible size fortunes will continue growing. Maybe we tax $1T at 100%, I don't know, but we are going to have to inconvenience some rich people if we want to stop living in hell.

  • source
  • parent