• humorlessrepost@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    A million? Retire at 60 instead of 70, and change nothing else.

    A billion? Retire today, buy a few mansions across the world, and start a few SuperPACs.

    From there, it’s just more SuperPACs for a while.

    A trillion? Add in a mercenary army with a few spy satellites.

    • Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      You missed the point of the exercise.

      What would you do with 50k?

      100k?

      200k

      500k

      1M

      2M

      5M

      10, 20, 50, 100, 250M?

      500 Millions?

      1B?

      Then think how many people could have a better life with just a “meager” 50K… if some billionaire were taxed slightly more…

      I’m not even talking about the vast majority of earths population that would see their life getting better with fifty bucks here and there.

      • VelvetStorm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I mean for me anything after the 500k mark is just going to be givin away to people or communities in need. I can live off of 500k and a job for the rest of my life.

        • humorlessrepost@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Personally I feel like I could do more good with super PACs by supporting politicians who would help those people and communities by forcing my fellow billionaires to also contribute. I don’t like the system I find myself in, but I don’t want to throw myself into the “Yet you participate in society. Curious!” hole.

          • VelvetStorm@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            I get it but I don’t trust the government to ever get better so I would rather give directly to the people or directly pay their bills so they don’t get hit with the taxes from the money givin to them.

      • humorlessrepost@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        You missed the point of the exercise

        I didn’t answer your question in the way your script anticipated. I’m not your student.

        If your script requires people to not know what they’d do with that much money, and then they do, it’s not a great rebuttal to tell them to stay on-script. That’s some Ray Comfort level rhetoric.

        That said, I support far higher taxation of the wealthy. My criticism isn’t of your goal, but that your method is flawed enough to detract from it.

        • Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          If you didn’t get it, this is the reason:

          You, and many others, use a multiplayer of 1.000 ; million, billion, trillion.

          Those enormous steps exceeds human comprehension.

          So use 2 instead.

          Have a nice day mr grumpy!

      • jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        5 months ago

        Counterargument: think how many of those people could be put out of their misery if the cost of water was increased to $1k/gallon and all other sources of water were removed.

      • humorlessrepost@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        I didn’t say I’d retire today, I said I’d retire 10 years earlier than my current trajectory while not changing anything else. I’d keep working and contributing to retirement.