Time to tax wealth - Covid cost Solution

LuasSimon

In this like many other countries there is a huge difference between taxing income and taxing wealth .
Is it fair that someone with 40 Million in wealth only pays tax on their income of 100k pays 30k in tax whilst someone with no assets earning 60k pays 15K tax ?

Pkiernan

Let me hazard a guess.

You wont be one of the people affected by a wealth tax.

Beasty

If someone has €40m in assets there's a fair chance they are earning (taxable) income on some if not all those assets. They may also have paid Stamp Duty when purchasing some of those assets. They face capital gains tax when they sell their assets, an if they give them away, or die while owning them there's Capital Acquisitions Tax to consider

Capital is far from tax free

Geuze

LuasSimon wrote: »

In this like many other countries there is a huge difference between taxing income and taxing wealth .
Is it fair that someone with 40 Million in wealth only pays tax on their income of 100k pays 30k in tax whilst someone with no assets earning 60k pays 15K tax ?

Wealth taxes have proven to be difficult to administer.

As such, some countries scrapped them.

I not totally against them, although I don't think a wealth tax would raise as much as some communists/Marxists in Ireland suggest.

astrofool

Yes, lets, we'll take, say $10 trillion away from the wealthiest and evenly divide it among everyone on the planet (~7 billion), so we each get $1400. What do we do next?

Or do you want to redirect the wealth towards Irish citizens only?

Geuze

LuasSimon wrote: »

In this like many other countries there is a huge difference between taxing income and taxing wealth .
Is it fair that someone with 40 Million in wealth only pays tax on their income of 100k pays 30k in tax whilst someone with no assets earning 60k pays 15K tax ?

Here is some reading on wealth taxes:

https://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2020/01/wealth-and-taxes-overview.html

4068ac1elhodqr

astrofool wrote: »

Yes, lets, we'll take, say $10 trillion away from the wealthiest and evenly divide it among everyone on the planet (~7 billion), so we each get $1400. What do we do next?

As of 2018, there are over 2,200 U.S. dollar billionaires worldwide, with a combined wealth of over US$9.1 trillion (up from US$7.67 trillion in 2017).
According to a 2017 Oxfam report, the 'top 8' richest billionaires own as much combined wealth as "half the human race".

$1,300 for everyone on the planet sure would do a whole massive heap of goodnesss. For many folks (hundred of millions) with only two sticks to rub together, it's likely a near lifetime guarantee of success in health, enterprise, employment, education or some basic housing for a family using the combined 2600usd. If under 18's are included (29% of globe) in the superbonu$money party, that's their higher education paid for in most parts.

For every single (1) billionaire, they're securing a life of prosper or betterment, for 3,181,818 people. Not a bad idea, and not a bad ratio of contribution.

lawred2

There was a time I'd have disagreed with a wealth tax but wealth inequality is so out of control at this stage that something has to be done to rebalance the scales.

astrofool

Remy Broad Cave wrote: »

As of 2018, there are over 2,200 U.S. dollar billionaires worldwide, with a combined wealth of over US$9.1 trillion (up from US$7.67 trillion in 2017).
According to a 2017 Oxfam report, the 'top 8' richest billionaires own as much combined wealth as "half the human race".

$1,300 for everyone on the planet sure would do a whole massive heap of goodnesss. For many folks (hundred of millions) with only two sticks to rub together, it's likely a near lifetime guarantee of success in health, enterprise, employment, education or some basic housing for a family using the combined 2600usd. If under 18's are included (29% of globe) in the superbonu$money party, that's their higher education paid for in most parts.

For every single (1) billionaire, they're securing a life of prosper or betterment, for 3,181,818 people. Not a bad idea, and not a bad ratio of contribution.

There is 7bn people on earth and about $360trn held privately, tax it at 3% per year, and divide it evenly, and everyone gets $1400 a year for 30 years.

Most of these wealth taxes are along the lines of "someone else has money, I should have that money".

The other reality is that the governments control the money anyway, so it's not in their interest to dilute it's value by doing redistribution at this level (and dollars to donuts, after a year, the money would be back in the hands of those it started off with).

Fred Cryton

When you think about it a tax on wealth would actually be the second time the wealth has been taxed. The first time you were taxed on whatever activity it was which allowed you to purchase the asset (such as income tax on salary, which is used to buy a property.) So if you used your after tax income to purchase something, why should you be taxed again on the asset you own?

The only tax on wealth should be inheritance tax, because you clearly didn't earn it if you're born into it. Even that is questionable as your parents paid income tax as described above, but at least it didn't apply to you personally.

Yellow_Fern

LuasSimon wrote: »

In this like many other countries there is a huge difference between taxing income and taxing wealth .
Is it fair that someone with 40 Million in wealth only pays tax on their income of 100k pays 30k in tax whilst someone with no assets earning 60k pays 15K tax ?

That money isnt normally hoarded. Its out doing something, usually in businesses. If it hoarded it will can be subject to negative interest rates. Normal people are shielded from this.

Beasty

lawred2 wrote: »

There was a time I'd have disagreed with a wealth tax but wealth inequality is so out of control at this stage that something has to be done to rebalance the scales.

It's one of those things though that if introduced unilaterally in Ireland it a flight of capital (and rich individuals) would occur. Those with the most can afford the best advice to ensure they keep the most. That results in Ireland losing rather than gaining tax receipts.

It only works if you adopt a global approach. Now that is, to a limited extent, already happening in the Corporate World, but we remain very far from a standard set of tax rules between any two countries, let alone all nations across the World

markodaly

LuasSimon wrote: »

In this like many other countries there is a huge difference between taxing income and taxing wealth .
Is it fair that someone with 40 Million in wealth only pays tax on their income of 100k pays 30k in tax whilst someone with no assets earning 60k pays 15K tax ?

We already have a wealth tax in Ireland, its called the property tax, which, as you guess it all the left wing parties oppose....

The Irish Left for you.

Atlantic Dawn

Put 10 cent on a litre of fresh air.

Shefwedfan

Start at bottom and work way up

Social welfare:
Shut down the never ending child allowance, 3-4 kids, don’t care but Pick a max and stop, want anymore pay for them yourself
Christmas bonus gone
Stop at source rent for council houses, fix that then come back

aligator_am

LuasSimon wrote: »

In this like many other countries there is a huge difference between taxing income and taxing wealth .
Is it fair that someone with 40 Million in wealth only pays tax on their income of 100k pays 30k in tax whilst someone with no assets earning 60k pays 15K tax ?

If this wealth tax is going to be applied based on asset value then you can be sure that the "poor" farmers will be out in force against it.

Something else other countries do, including the very left leaning Scandinavians is that they will give very generous unemployment payouts, for a very limited time.

For some reason (my theory is that it's a vote earner) Ireland seems to reward certain tranches of society here to suckle on the teat of government handouts from cradle to grave, at the expense of the working man.

If you try to implement this kind of tax, then people who have mobile cash assets will just uproot their dosh and move it out of here.

Also, the person who as €40 million in wealth, are they running a company, if so then how many employees do they have? How much tax are those employees contributing to the exchequer each month?

If the employer pulls the plug after this new tax approach is enforced, they may well just jump ship and relocate to a much friendlier location from their point of view.

Shefwedfan

The plan was to spend 21.2 billion this year on social welfare before Covid....300 million is Christmas bonus.

rn

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Start at bottom and work way up

Social welfare:
Shut down the never ending child allowance, 3-4 kids, don’t care but Pick a max and stop, want anymore pay for them yourself
Christmas bonus gone
Stop at source rent for council houses, fix that then come back

This post pretty much hits the weakest in society, hardest.

nigeldaniel

By all accounts tax the bloodstock business [Horses] good and proper, whatever about the wealthy.

a_squirrelman

The wealthy are already taxed st 40%.

machiavellianme

a_squirrelman wrote: »

The wealthy are already taxed st 40%.

I'm not wealthy but I'm taxed a whole lot more than 40%, just like many on here. Especially when you add in vat on many goods after income tax, property tax, motor tax, etc.

a_squirrelman

machiavellianme wrote: »

I'm not wealthy but I'm taxed a whole lot more than 40%, just like many on here. Especially when you add in vat on many goods after income tax, property tax, motor tax, etc.

Yep exactly. And richer people pay those things too. And if they have investments they pay CGT on gains. If they have higher incomes they pay higher income tax/USC/etc.

So I don't know what kind of wealth tax would suit the OP. There is property tax already sure.

lawred2

a_squirrelman wrote: »

The wealthy are already taxed st 40%.

You don't understand what wealth is

a_squirrelman

lawred2 wrote: »

You don't understand what wealth is

Yes I do, those on much higher salaries are also taxed at 40%.

declanflynn

aligator_am wrote: »

If this wealth tax is going to be applied based on asset value then you can be sure that the "poor" farmers will be out in force against it.

Something else other countries do, including the very left leaning Scandinavians is that they will give very generous unemployment payouts, for a very limited time.

For some reason (my theory is that it's a vote earner) Ireland seems to reward certain tranches of society here to suckle on the teat of government handouts from cradle to grave, at the expense of the working man.

If you try to implement this kind of tax, then people who have mobile cash assets will just uproot their dosh and move it out of here.

Also, the person who as €40 million in wealth, are they running a company, if so then how many employees do they have? How much tax are those employees contributing to the exchequer each month?

If the employer pulls the plug after this new tax approach is enforced, they may well just jump ship and relocate to a much friendlier location from their point of view.

O yeah the farmers, we need to screw more out of them, farming is responsible for 13% of our exports and 200000 jobs plus they provide us with top quality food.
Average income on farms is€21000, are you Larry Goodman?

lawred2

a_squirrelman wrote: »

Yes I do, those on much higher salaries are also taxed at 40%.

You don't really..

Real wealth is accumulated largely passively. Not through salaried employment.

Employment is more than sufficiently taxed in Ireland.

a_squirrelman

lawred2 wrote: »

You don't really..

Real wealth is accumulated largely passively. Not through salaried employment.

Employment is more than sufficiently taxed in Ireland.

So if I as a salaried person am investing passively each month so I can maybe retire a couple of years early and have a decent standard of life in later years then that is the wealth the OP wants to steal from me?

Jaysus, that sucks, imagine acting a little responsibly and planning for your future only for it to be robbed by those who don't take financial responsibility for their lives.

lawred2

a_squirrelman wrote: »

So if I as a salaried person am investing passively each month so I can maybe retire a couple of years early and have a decent standard of life in later years then that is the wealth the OP wants to steal from me?

Jaysus, that sucks, imagine acting a little responsibly and planning for your future only for it to be robbed by those who don't take financial responsibility for their lives.

Yeah your definition of wealth and mine are a long way apart.

Do you have 40m in assets?

a_squirrelman

lawred2 wrote: »

Yeah your definition of wealth and mine are a long way apart.

Do you have 40m in assets?

No I don't of course. But what do you propose? Those with 40m in assets are generally in business and providing jobs.



Share your idea with us, I would really like to hear the ideas of how to tax the wealthy and where the cut off of wealthy/not wealthy lies. I'm not being sarcastic at all btw, genuinely curious.

Idbatterim

rn wrote: »

This post pretty much hits the weakest in society, hardest.

Here we go ! Many people I know struggling and breaking their balls to safe deposit, to get rip off housing and borrowing from everyone they can , so many of " the most vulnerable " can continue fo blow billions of the welfare budget and absolute waste expenditure, if you arebt earning it yourself. How much of the welfare budgets goes on alcohol, cigarettes, take away, expensive broadband, tv , mobile packages, yeah.... billions , billions that the working poor in particular pay a heavy price for! They dont get free housing, medical carx , all the other cloud cuckoo land stuff!

overkill602

A vote winner for sure but they might be afraid one day there is no wealth left to tax.

enricoh

A lad I know pays e30 a month for his council house, I said e30 a week is it not surely.
I was wrong, he was right!
A mate rents his 3 bed semi income of the most sought after estates near me for e1250 a month, the tenant pays 100 hap pay the rest. He has one nipper that stays with him 2 nights a week.
No house insurance needed, no property tax, no servicing the boiler, no rainy day fund for repairs needed.

I know employers that can only get staff to do 20hrs a week so they keep all the benefits.
It's self defeating- its too attractive to do the same, so more and more will.
Taxing the rich in Ireland is like trying to fill a bucket with a hole in it

twowheelsonly

Shefwedfan wrote: »

The plan was to spend 21.2 billion this year on social welfare before Covid....300 million is Christmas bonus.

Have you ever looked at the breakdown of that spend ?
It's not just all given out to fellas that have no desire to ever work.
The biggest portion of that (37% approx) is Pensions, followed by Illness, Disability and Carers at 20% approx. Plenty of other 'worthy' payments as well - Childrens allowance, FIS, etc. I'd nearly go as far as to say that the dole spongers that we hear about so often are probably get one of the smallest slices of that cake.

---

Back to the OP... How to define wealth ? Is 500k in the bank wealthy or is it 1m ? Or 20m ? The starting line is almost impossible to define. The fella with 1m will be bitter that he's paying the same tax as the fella with 20m who will in turn be biiter that he's paying the same rate as the fella with 100m.

Is my mother wealthy ? She bought her house for 10 grand and it's now worth north of 500k. She's never even held 10k in her hand, not to mind 500k!! That's how assets work. Most 'wealthy' businessmen have all their assets tied up like that.

McGiver

machiavellianme wrote:

I'm not wealthy but I'm taxed a whole lot more than 40%, just like many on here. Especially when you add in vat on many goods after income tax, property tax, motor tax, etc.

You're should really see comparison of taxation in the EU. I've done the analysis, it includes estimated VAT effect too, and Ireland comes 3rd lowest. After, surprise surprise, two tiny tax havens ex-British Cyprus and Malta.

Taxes in Ireland are low overall bar few exceptions.

Income tax is badly structured though, I'd restructure that, probably more bands.
Local Property Tax is too low, needs to be increased, that's the only way to tax wealth.

Capital Gains Tax should be decreased, a lot. And potentially even removed for long term investors. This is way too high and discourages investment.

lawred2

lawred2 wrote: »

Yeah your definition of wealth and mine are a long way apart.

Do you have 40m in assets?

How many people in Ireland have 40m in assets? I mean, people now, not a company's assets. let's make it easier... how many Irish people have 20 million is assets that can be accessed easily (and without losing massively in value)

The truth is that this push to tax the "rich" or the "wealthy" is a drive away from dealing responsibility with the realities of being a small nation. Ireland cannot afford a situation where the poor (and that seems to include a wide range of people) are provided every resource that the rich can avail of. Just as Ireland cannot afford to provide every possible service (and of top quality) to everyone else as part of state benefits (taxpayers).

Ireland is still a small country with limited income streams and a growing cost base. People don't want to accept the realities of the situation. We don't have lucrative natural resource deposits, we don't have a strong industrial base, etc. We have a mainly service economy at a time when service economies are very shaky in terms of economics. Previously profitable but hardly sustainable long-term.

And that's what this all comes down to. Sustainability. Ireland cannot afford to provide all the services it currently provides. Taxing the rich is the easy way out, and just as unreasonable in expecting it to work, for any extended period. Rather than look at/deal with the real problems within our society, and find ways to minimalise them forever, we're expected to believe a fantasy. That Ireland can do what economic giants are struggling to do.

It's time to wake up and stop pretending. Be responsible, and cut the wastage that is driving this nation further towards debt. Stop blaming the rich for issues that they're not responsible for, no more than the middle class are responsible for them. Go back to a degree of capitalism where people have the right not to feel guilty for saving the money they have earned.... and a State that encourages financial personal responsibility.

This push to steal (and yes, I do see it as stealing) from the wealthy to provide for everyone else is too damn close to fraud. I'm not even remotely close to rich or wealthy, but I know that they've paid the same or more taxes that I have. They deserve to enjoy the fruits of their success (or their parents success) without being sent to the gallows, simply because the less fortunate are unwilling to face facts. There will always be inequalities, because every successful economy relies on competition to drive profits/success forward. Taking that away is a recipe for disaster.

Ultimanemo

Very recently a charter flight from Bulgaria brought in a plane load of fruit pickers
If people apply for those jobs and keep the money in Ireland we don't need any more taxes

Idbatterim

twowheelsonly wrote: »

Have you ever looked at the breakdown of that spend ?
It's not just all given out to fellas that have no desire to ever work.
The biggest portion of that (37% approx) is Pensions, followed by Illness, Disability and Carers at 20% approx. Plenty of other 'worthy' payments as well - Childrens allowance, FIS, etc. I'd nearly go as far as to say that the dole spongers that we hear about so often are probably get one of the smallest slices of that cake.

---

Back to the OP... How to define wealth ? Is 500k in the bank wealthy or is it 1m ? Or 20m ? The starting line is almost impossible to define. The fella with 1m will be bitter that he's paying the same tax as the fella with 20m who will in turn be biiter that he's paying the same rate as the fella with 100m.

Is my mother wealthy ? She bought her house for 10 grand and it's now worth north of 500k. She's never even held 10k in her hand, not to mind 500k!! That's how assets work. Most 'wealthy' businessmen have all their assets tied up like that.

We are aware of this, youd get disability here, as another oister inde out it , for two hairs in your head growing in different directions. 65% of those in social housing dont or have never worked, Eric cartman gave this figure, hopefully he can clarify . The dole sponges getting property with up to 3,000 a month in Dublin paid for in some cases.

The welfare bonus should be scrapped immediately, use it to abolish stamp duty on house sales ... review council " Rents" , deduct at source. Cap child allowance at 3 kids absolute max

McGiver

McGiver wrote: »

You're should really see comparison of taxation in the EU. I've done the analysis, it includes estimated VAT effect too, and Ireland comes 3rd lowest. After, surprise surprise, two tiny tax havens ex-British Cyprus and Malta.

Taxes in Ireland are low overall bar few exceptions.

Income tax is badly structured though, I'd restructure that, probably more bands.
Local Property Tax is too low, needs to be increased, that's the only way to tax wealth.

Capital Gains Tax should be decreased, a lot. And potentially even removed for long term investors. This is way too high and discourages investment.

Ireland is a very expensive place to live in, though. Cost of living here is high. Compare Ireland with similar countries of it's size and 'quality' of services... The cost of living has risen and fallen a few times over the last two decades, but I'm always more than a little shocked whenever I return home for extended periods. And that's without considering (for me) taxes on employment (I pay other Irish taxes)

twowheelsonly

enricoh wrote: »

A lad I know pays e30 a month for his council house, I said e30 a week is it not surely.
I was wrong, he was right!

He must have the tiniest income in Ireland !!
What are his circumstances that he only pays that much ?

McGiver

aligator_am wrote:

Something else other countries do, including the very left leaning Scandinavians is that they will give very generous unemployment payouts, for a very limited time.

Scandinavians are not that left, that's a misunderstanding. They're more community and consensus based. They understand it's good not to have people dying of cold and hunger.

Regarding unemployment benefits, this is what Ireland should copy from Europe. Most countries on the continent including Scandinavia give % of your last salary (usually capped at some sort of a multiple of average wage) for several months. Then you go to the basic low unemployment benefit. I'm just baffled why this is not the case in Ireland.

In Sweden you get 80% last salary for few months and then 70% salary for another few months, obviously only if you have contributed to the social system from your wages. If you didn't contribute and didn't have long enough employment you don't get paid. After 9 months the benefit goes back to the minimal unemployment benefit. It is very similar in Germany and other countries.

Whereas in Ireland - person who has contributed 5 years PRSI will get the same unemployment benefit as someone who has never worked for example. This is unfair and discourages employment. It must be changed.

Idbatterim

twowheelsonly wrote: »

He must have the tiniest income in Ireland !!
What are his circumstances that he only pays that much ?

A lad I know in the luxury apartments in dundrum is paying e50 a week , it wouldn't even cover the annual management fee! Meanwhile working poor neighbour's win similar apartment in that area, would pay e1900 a month for it , fcuking comedy

McGiver

Deleted User wrote:

Ireland is a very expensive place to live in, though. Cost of living here is high. Compare Ireland with similar countries of it's size and 'quality' of services... The cost of living has risen and fallen a few times over the last two decades, but I'm always more than a little shocked whenever I return home for extended periods. And that's without considering (for me) taxes on employment (I pay other Irish taxes)

Cost of living is irrelevant. The analysis of overall level of taxation is in relative terms i.e. percentage. Cost of living has no bearing on that. There are several countries with higher cost of living than Ireland (Luxembourg, Denmark, Sweden, some places in Germany, Finland, Netherlands) with higher overall taxation.

twowheelsonly

Idbatterim wrote: »

We are aware of this, youd get disability here, as another oister inde out it , for two hairs in your head growing in different directions. 65% of those in social housing dont or have never worked, Eric cartman gave this figure, hopefully he can clarify . The dole sponges getting property with up to 3,000 a month in Dublin paid for in some cases.

The welfare bonus should be scrapped immediately, use it to abolish stamp duty on house sales ... review council " Rents" , deduct at source. Cap child allowance at 3 kids absolute max

I'm guessing that came from a DCC report last year that quoted somewhere around that figure as Housing Applicants
That's a big difference to actual tenants. Many applicants are those who have just turned 18 and apply as a matter of course as it's endemic in 'certain quarters'.
Biggest mistake ever in this country was introducing HAP. That's a far bigger waste of money than building council houses and it goes straight into the hands of sometimes very wealthy landlords and vulture funds.

That's all getting off-topic though and is an entirely different discussion..

enricoh

twowheelsonly wrote: »

He must have the tiniest income in Ireland !!
What are his circumstances that he only pays that much ?

On disability allowance , does a few nixers on the side.

There is an obvious cohort of people in this country who are getting away with murder in terms of how much tax they pay, compared to other European countries.





The low paid.

Taxes should be increased at the lower bands to have those lower paid contribute more and tax credits reduced. The knock-on affect will see those middle and higher incomes pay slightly more as well.

I assume this is fine with you, OP?
Since you feel the wealthy are not paying their share, I'm sure you are as equally outraged at the others not paying their share as well, am I right?

LuasSimon

LuasSimon wrote: »

In this like many other countries there is a huge difference between taxing income and taxing wealth .
Is it fair that someone with 40 Million in wealth only pays tax on their income of 100k pays 30k in tax whilst someone with no assets earning 60k pays 15K tax ?

You are extremely wealthy compared to billions of people in the world.

Let's get into the nitty -gritty now, in % terms how much of your wealth do you give away to the poor in the world? I'd hope it's a good 30 or 40%.

antix80

LuasSimon wrote: »

In this like many other countries there is a huge difference between taxing income and taxing wealth .
Is it fair that someone with 40 Million in wealth only pays tax on their income of 100k pays 30k in tax whilst someone with no assets earning 60k pays 15K tax ?

We have many wealth taxes.

We have property tax, inheritance tax, at times pension fund levies, deemed encashment on 8th anniversary of certain investments, close company surcharges, ARF minimum withdrawals.

We also have high income tax.

Rich people tend not to base themselves in countries with aggressive tax regimes. That's how they stay rich. If they don't stick around to pay 50% income tax what makes you think they'll fork over 1% of their wealth on top of that?

Let's say their €40m company made a €1m profit and they withdrew it all as a salary. Income Tax €500k. Wealth tax €400k. Take home pay €100k.
The following year the company makes a loss of €1m. Income tax zero. No liquidity to pay the wealth tax of €390,000.. Umm..

Wealth taxes as a percentage of wealth are unworkable. The only people who the government would have any success in squeezing a wealth tax from are the middle class, and it wouldn't raise a lot of money because there's only so much juice you can squeeze. You won't get anything from the ultra rich because they'll choose not to live in your socialist paradise.

splinter65

Remy Broad Cave wrote: »

As of 2018, there are over 2,200 U.S. dollar billionaires worldwide, with a combined wealth of over US$9.1 trillion (up from US$7.67 trillion in 2017).
According to a 2017 Oxfam report, the 'top 8' richest billionaires own as much combined wealth as "half the human race".

$1,300 for everyone on the planet sure would do a whole massive heap of goodnesss. For many folks (hundred of millions) with only two sticks to rub together, it's likely a near lifetime guarantee of success in health, enterprise, employment, education or some basic housing for a family using the combined 2600usd. If under 18's are included (29% of globe) in the superbonu$money party, that's their higher education paid for in most parts.

For every single (1) billionaire, they're securing a life of prosper or betterment, for 3,181,818 people. Not a bad idea, and not a bad ratio of contribution.

Ok. Let’s go along with this. You believe that there’s a way of getting $1400 to each person on the planet without any overhead costs and without any government or NGO stealing it (despite the fact that for many years
$ billions are given in charity every year and it not reaching them) .
You believe that this money will last them a life time.
Do you believe this once of redistribution of wealth will get rid of world poverty forever?

Wanderer78

We can start with a land value tax!

Wanderer78

splinter65 wrote:

Ok. Let’s go along with this. You believe that there’s a way of getting $1400 to each person on the planet without any overhead costs and without any government or NGO stealing it (despite the fact that for many years $ billions are given in charity every year and it not reaching them) . You believe that this money will last them a life time. Do you believe this once of redistribution of wealth will get rid of world poverty forever?

Money creation is easy, getting 1400 to every human would be relatively easy, particularly those with bank accounts

rgace

I'm always surprised by how many people are against these ideas. Just because you side with the billionaire class doesn't mean you are one or will ever be one.

The only point of debate for me is where you draw the line, one person having billions is clearly morally wrong to me but what about 100 million and so on.