> Big fortunes in excess of 1B are not made by working or salary. They are made by winning the IPO lottery. Or winning the stock market lottery or the real estate lottery.
And those companies add value, otherwise the stocks value will be zero.
> It's only fair that the government also take half of all (and I mean all sorts) of lottery jackpots and for previous winnings everything in excess of one billion.
No, it is not fair to take money away from people. It is not a matter of poor or rich. In any case you take stolen property or money. Not money they made. That's an entirely different thing.
Via regulations or collusion should be also considered stealing to some extent IMHO.
> And those companies add value, otherwise the stocks value will be zero.
Those riches were made by being the captain of a plane which had an incredible luck to have a once in a lifetime 250mph tailwind. And now people who are idiots think the captain is a God, whereas it's just blind luck and once in a lifetime tailwind.
If you had any other person piloting the plane it would have been the same. That's unjust enrichement and society has always punished that, and it's exemplified by the PowerBall lotter where the Govt. takes half or even more.
If you took all the stock owned by billionaires and transfered them to Pension funds nothing will change. Apple would still make iPhones and Microsoft would still make Windows, Google would still make Android etc.
> Those riches were made by being the captain of a plane which had an incredible luck to have a once in a lifetime 250mph tailwind
Oh, so everyone that gets rich is like this? I see. Curious that you generalize like this. There are many kinds of rich people. I can think of at least 3 or 4 of them that for me have been mostly talent. But our opinions might differ. I do not see as a good thing to extract people what they earnt bc other people wanted to pay for their services in the absence of collusion. Because if they use their services they must have value in the first place.
> If you had any other person piloting the plane it would have been the same.
No way. Many people start with no plane. When they have a plane or two they face the systematic attack of people like you. I am still to see why that happens. Not all rich are good. But not all rich are bad. Same for normal people.
> If you took all the stock owned by billionaires and transfered them to Pension funds nothing will change. Apple would still make iPhones and Microsoft would still make Windows, Google would still make Android etc
So yes, you are right. You are telling me they are capable of creating value and things people are willing to pay for even if they were stolen and you use this sad argument of "they have too much" as an argument for stealing the earnings of people who create value in some way or another, like it or not.
You also say they would get rich again (a proof that what they do is useful to others, they get transfer towards their business bc ppl want to pay!) and what you propose is to keep punishing them bc they created value.
Regarding that you can transfer all <to a cause you see fair> and does not make a difference does not mean it is fair to steal the money to who is making it in absence of coercion, violence or collusion, which are the ways to cheat, as an example, when the state raises you taxes 10% or puts a new tax and you can do nothing.
By that measure of stealing bc some have too much and others too little a homeless could go get your home on the basis that you have one but the homeless does not, to give just an example of inequality and wealth transfer. It is not about the amount but about what you are proposing.
> No way. Many people start with no plane. When they have a plane or two they face the systematic attack of people like you. I am still to see why that happens. Not all rich are good. But not all rich are bad. Same for normal people.
PowerBall winner start with no nothing, it's the same thing.
> So yes, you are right. You are telling me they are capable of creating value and things people are willing to pay for even if they were stolen and you use this sad argument of "they have too much" as an argument for stealing the earnings of people who create value in some way or another, like it or not.
Absolutely not, the Pension funds will install new CEOs which are MBAs who'd be happy with a 15M/yr salary, and of course the company will keep winning and prospering. We have proof of this. Goldman Sachs is not owned by Goldman and Sachs...JPMorgan is not owned by John PierPont Morgan and on and on. The outsted billionaire can now enjoy his retirement with his 999M. Poor thing! The public gets to enjoy the exta trillions of dollars which the measure would inject into pension funds.
It's a free meal , in fact due to the high concentration of wealth nobody would cry for billionaires. If millionaires and non-billionaire rich people are even half as smart as you say they are they are not so crazy to think that them with their net worth of 9-10M can one day become a billionaire and thus be impacted by such measure.
> Regarding that you can transfer all <to a cause you see fair> and does not make a difference does not mean it is fair to steal the money to who is making it in absence of coercion, violence or collusion, which are the ways to cheat, as an example, when the state raises you taxes 10% or puts a new tax and you can do nothing.
Extreme luck has always been punished or halved by taxation, except in modern day America
> PowerBall winner start with no nothing, it's the same thing.
Check how many of those remain rich and you will discover some insights compared to people who make fortune from their own work.
> Absolutely not, the Pension funds will install new CEOs which are MBAs who'd be happy with...
Idk the full story, but putting new CEOs happy with money that most of us cannot get, I do not see the problem. As for how it works, this is how a business works, not how all business work.
> It's a free meal
No, it is not. To reach there you must work for it first unless you were born rich. And if you were born rich, in a couple generations you can leave things bankrupt. Most of the capital generated comes and goes and there is a lot of evidence of this.
> If millionaires and non-billionaire rich people are even half as smart as you say
It is not being smart only. It is a set of habits. The temporal choice , for example, which is sacrificing immediate pleasure for hard work to have a bigger reward in the future is one of the traits that helps. And you do not need to be extremely smart, sometimes it is work attitudes, or how you keep your wealth and reinvest it. I cannot blame people for managing well their resources. In any case I would blame people who cheat to accumulate them.
> Extreme luck has always been punished
Idk whether it has been, but what I am sure of is that I am not willing to punish lucky people or stealing people who make their own wealth in fair ways. The equivalent for me would be cutting a leg to the fast one or smashing the face of a good-looking person. It just makes no sense to me.
And those companies add value, otherwise the stocks value will be zero.
> It's only fair that the government also take half of all (and I mean all sorts) of lottery jackpots and for previous winnings everything in excess of one billion.
No, it is not fair to take money away from people. It is not a matter of poor or rich. In any case you take stolen property or money. Not money they made. That's an entirely different thing.
Via regulations or collusion should be also considered stealing to some extent IMHO.