536
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2026
536 points (99.8% liked)
The Onion and other satire w/ layers
2666 readers
662 users here now
For posting satire from The Onion and other similar sources.
redundancy, but not for its own sake
Human crafted content only please! If reporting a violation or suspicious content please provide evidence in the report or a direct message. Thank you.
Be nice. All instance rules apply.
Rules:
- Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
- No Ads / Spamming.
- No pornography.
Règles :
- Soyez respectueux. Tout le monde doit se sentir le bienvenu ici.
- Pas de bigoterie - y compris le racisme, le sexisme, le capacitisme, l’homophobie, la transphobie ou la xénophobie.
- Pas de publicités / Pas de spam.
- Pas de pornographie.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Sounds slow.
If Elon wants to claim he is a Trillionaire for ego points, fine, we tax him at that, at 100% for any worth over 1 billion dollars.
Or he can STFU and talk about his actual "value". And then we still tax the hell out of it because no one needs anywhere near that much money over ten lifetimes.
And now you've stolen the company he founded and self funded with a hundred million dollars and given it to venture capitalists and hedge funds, because of some perceived and unrealized gain.
It'd be the same for any person with a meaningful stake in a company.
Your basically advocating that once a company reaches a certain size, the founders and possibly the early investors have to give up their ownership and the influence that offers.
Edit: a company like SpaceX and countless others simply wouldn't exist under rules like that.
Edit: and that size is literally at the whim of the markets since stock values dont represent the current day value. Imagine a company being led by a founder and hedge funds scheme a plot to raise the stock price through something like a gamma squeeze to force the founder to sell shares from that temporary gain, so they can do a hostile takeover. If thats possible, itll happen.
Yeah, thats kind of the idea, they sell to others, it spreads the interest of the company out so it better represents societies needs and not the whims of one asshole. You don't want that to happen, you run it privately off its own profits without the shareholder parasite class involved.
And we don't need Space X. We fucking HAD NASA. Space was fun and hopeful but now Space is stupid because its all under the umbrella of this single Nazi asshole.
Founders often run their companies better
https://hbr.org/2016/03/founder-led-companies-outperform-the-rest-heres-why
The "spread it out" doesn't get spread out to society, it will get spread out to other venture capitalists and hedge funds, and they are never as interested in the long term vision and plans for the company as its founders are.
Saying, sorry, you can't run the company the way you want after a certain size (edit: within the law obviously), is just plain shortsighted.
I'm not saying don't tax them when they try to realize those gains via selling or borrowing, and it can even be at incredibly high rates, but stealing the company from them is not the right decision. Make them choose, their company or the wealth it generated.
Edit: And just to be clear - yes you can be a CEO without any shares, but without your founding shares giving you influence, you won't have the same kind of influence within the company, ultimately neutering your ability to function the way you'd like and stiffling whatever vision / passion you might have.