Trillionaires & Democracy

[MajorRewrite]

Gabriel Zucman is an economist who is considered the world’s leading authority on wealth inequality. He wrote this interesting editorial …

The era of trillionaires will be dire for democracy

Simply put, there is a fundamental tension between extreme wealth and the very possibility of democracy. Extreme wealth is always an extreme power. It’s the power to stifle competition, the power to shape public discourse, the power to influence policymaking, the power to buy elections, the power to stall social progress.

For some time, after the second world war, it looked like extreme wealth belonged to the past and that we could forget this problem. After the shocks of the wars and the rise of progressive income and inheritance taxation – with top marginal tax rates that reached nearly 100% in both the UK and the US in the postwar decades – extreme wealth had largely disappeared. But it’s now coming back in full force.

That’s how Musk could buy Twitter on a whim for $44bn in 2022; that’s how Larry Ellison can buy TikTok, CBS and CNN today; that’s how billionaires could account for 20% of all political donations in the 2024 federal election cycle.

It is time to break decisively with the perverse logic in which retirees, the poor or immigrants are expected to balance the budget, while the rich are to be allowed to live tax-free in their own parallel society. There cannot be a law more lenient for the rich and powerful than for the rest of us. If ever there was a time to act, it is now.

In addition to the anti-democratic impact, our K-shaped economy is inflating the wealth of the rich and eroding the living standards of everyone else.

 

[Saint_Ann]

Civilization won't survive AI.

 

[MajorRewrite]

Civilization won't survive AI.

Someone please reset the Saint_Inanity bot. It’s spewing gibberish everywhere.

 

[Lazaran]

Gabriel Zucman is an economist who is considered the world’s leading authority on wealth inequality. He wrote this interesting editorial …

The era of trillionaires will be dire for democracy









In addition to the anti-democratic impact, our K-shaped economy is inflating the wealth of the rich and eroding the living standards of everyone else.

That ^ is my primary argument against "Citizens United": The wealthy already had outsized power influence over election and society. "Citizens United" was THE inflection point for the decline of democracy and the associated efforts towards a fair & equitable society.

NOW it is what it is.

“REVOLUTION!!!”???



Probably.



We. Told. Them. So.

 

[Saint_Ann]

Someone please reset the Saint_Inanity bot. It’s spewing gibberish everywhere.

Ten bucks says I'm right. Lol.

 

[MajorRewrite]

Ten bucks says I'm right. Lol.

Your comments are all off topic, because you don’t understand anything.

 

[Lazaran]

Someone please reset the Saint_Inanity bot. It’s spewing gibberish everywhere.

Yeah, but in it’s current state it’s so weak / pathetic / impotent that it’s totally harmless & un-persuasive.

It’s that weird little kid that is equal parts amusing and annoying. On balance, it is NOT hurting anyone.

Let it be…

 

[Saint_Ann]

Your comments are all off topic, because you don’t understand anything.

I'm telling you none of that matters. It's academic.

 

[MajorRewrite]

The ultra-rich bribe politicians to get big payoffs.

Trump Plans to Protect Methane-Leaking Stripper Wells. This Billionaire Donor Will Benefit.

Long one of the oil industry’s top polluters, Hilcorp releases unusually large quantities of methane, a greenhouse gas that can trap 80 times more heat than carbon dioxide.

Hildebrand had never been a leading political contributor. But in 2024, the Biden administration issued aggressive restrictions on methane pollution — rules that would impose steep costs on Hilcorp — and the once-obscure tycoon became one of Trump’s biggest oil industry supporters, giving millions to his campaign.

Trump has since named a former Hilcorp lobbyist to a top post at the Environmental Protection Agency, putting him in charge of an effort to unravel the methane rules with help from trade groups backed by Hildebrand, a ProPublica investigation has found. That will bring a sweeping reprieve for the nation’s 700,000 stripper wells, boosting Hildebrand’s profits while saddling society as a whole with the climate fallout.

 

[coati]

Your comments are all off topic, because you don’t understand anything.

Actually, AI and data centers are closely related to the control of government by corporate oligarchs.

 

[icanhelp1]

The ultra-rich bribe politicians to get big payoffs.

Trump Plans to Protect Methane-Leaking Stripper Wells. This Billionaire Donor Will Benefit.

1. Consumption and demand create billionaires.

2. Irresponsible congressional spending, spending more than the revenue streams creates imbalances.

3. Congress's failure to regulate lobbyist is a huge failure.

4. Waste, fraud and abuse facilitated by irresponsible politicians. Failure to properly oversee the distribution of social programs funding is creating wealth inequality, also facilitates freeloading, making surviving on government handouts a comfortable living. Antithetical to healthy economic growth.

5. Raising taxes to compensate for wasteful spending creates wealth inequality.

6. Congress's inability to cap political donations facilitates wealthy politicians or candidates to exercise dominance over our political institutions.

7. Media's constant attempt to destroy fresh political candidates makes it very difficult to elect candidates with fresh ideas. Candidates don't want their names to be dragged through the mud.

8. Globalist politicians enabling millions of migrants from 3rd world countries to enter our country faster than they can assimilate only creates 3rd world pockets to congregate en masse in certain districts diluting the voting power of actual citizens.
9. Suicidal empathy over meritocracy. Globalist promoting nationalism as a pejorative is antithetical to a republic.

10. Failure of congress to initiate term limits.

Most of wealth inequalities can be traced back to congress and corrupt politicians, 5 decades worth. Politicians that make a career out of politics, consumed with self interest over constituent needs, start poor and retire millionaires several times over. More interested in party loyalty over their constituency. Congress has assumed more authority than the constitution allows by the letter of the law.

 

[dmallord]

Most of wealth inequalities can be traced back to congress and corrupt politicians, 5 decades worth. Politicians that make a career out of politics, consumed with self interest over constituent needs, start poor and retire millionaires several times over. More interested in party loyalty over their constituency. Congress has assumed more authority than the constitution allows by the letter of the law.

That’s too sweeping to be accurate. Some politicians become wealthy, but many already come from comfortable backgrounds, and rising net worth can come from investments, prior careers, or post-office opportunities—not just corruption. Wealth inequality is driven by many factors, so blaming it mainly on Congress oversimplifies the issue.

 

[MajorRewrite]

1. Consumption and demand create billionaires.

2. Irresponsible congressional spending, spending more than the revenue streams creates imbalances.

3. Congress's failure to regulate lobbyist is a huge failure.

4. Waste, fraud and abuse facilitated by irresponsible politicians. Failure to properly oversee the distribution of social programs funding is creating wealth inequality, also facilitates freeloading, making surviving on government handouts a comfortable living. Antithetical to healthy economic growth.

5. Raising taxes to compensate for wasteful spending creates wealth inequality.

6. Congress's inability to cap political donations facilitates wealthy politicians or candidates to exercise dominance over our political institutions.

7. Media's constant attempt to destroy fresh political candidates makes it very difficult to elect candidates with fresh ideas. Candidates don't want their names to be dragged through the mud.

8. Globalist politicians enabling millions of migrants from 3rd world countries to enter our country faster than they can assimilate only creates 3rd world pockets to congregate en masse in certain districts diluting the voting power of actual citizens.
9. Suicidal empathy over meritocracy. Globalist promoting nationalism as a pejorative is antithetical to a republic.

10. Failure of congress to initiate term limits.

Most of wealth inequalities can be traced back to congress and corrupt politicians, 5 decades worth. Politicians that make a career out of politics, consumed with self interest over constituent needs, start poor and retire millionaires several times over. More interested in party loyalty over their constituency. Congress has assumed more authority than the constitution allows by the letter of the law.

Congress forced Crooked Donnie to accept bribes?

You win today’s Bat-Shit Crazy Award

 

[icanhelp1]

That’s too sweeping to be accurate. Some politicians become wealthy, but many already come from comfortable backgrounds, and rising net worth can come from investments, prior careers, or post-office opportunities—not just corruption. Wealth inequality is driven by many factors, so blaming it mainly on Congress oversimplifies the issue.

I don't disagree with that. Pritzker is a good example. Elon Musk is another. I didn't say that rich people in politics are always corrupt. Not capping political donations is in my HO. Wealthy people like Steyer, for example Steyer contributed $215 million to his own campaign, that in my opinion should be illegal. The fact that he lost is not the point.

 

[icanhelp1]

Congress forced Crooked Donnie to accept bribes?

You win today’s Bat-Shit Crazy Award

What bribes??

 

[dmallord]

I don't disagree with that. Pritzker is a good example. Elon Musk is another. I didn't say that rich people in politics are always corrupt. Not capping political donations is in my HO. Wealthy people like Steyer, for example Steyer contributed $215 million to his own campaign, that in my opinion should be illegal. The fact that he lost is not the point.

No, you didn’t say that about rich people in politics. What you said was, "Most of wealth inequalities can be traced back to congress (sic) and corrupt politicians, 5 decades worth."

You did leave room for exceptions. I’ll give you that.

Thanks for the clarification on how you’d like to help resolve some of that. I’d lean toward term limits as a better approach. If you're limited to the time there in office, the sphere of influence should be smaller and might reduce the ability to create legislation that is fed by money and power outside your wheelhouse. You alluded to that by saying it spanned five decades.

I see some irony in your last statement. Seems money didn’t get him elected, did it? So, some other factors at play? Perhaps voter rejection was influenced by dislike of what he stood for/stands for?

It’s difficult to view money as the thing to limit in a campaign when we tend to view the most important thing voters, so we think, should be able to discern is BS when they see it. [That’s not true in a good number of voters, I’ll allow.]

It’s unfortunate that it takes a lot of money to run for office, so a good man with good ideas from the masses isn’t likely to rise up from among them and get elected as often. I can’t recall anyone in such a position coming to power for a very long time. None of the original Constitutional Framers were from the masses, as I recall.

 

[icanhelp1]

No, you didn’t say that about rich people in politics. What you said was, "Most of wealth inequalities can be traced back to congress (sic) and corrupt politicians, 5 decades worth."

You did leave room for exceptions. I’ll give you that.

Thanks for the clarification on how you’d like to help resolve some of that. I’d lean toward term limits as a better approach. If you're limited to the time there in office, the sphere of influence should be smaller and might reduce the ability to create legislation that is fed by money and power outside your wheelhouse. You alluded to that by saying it spanned five decades.

I see some irony in your last statement. Seems money didn’t get him elected, did it? So, some other factors at play? Perhaps voter rejection was influenced by dislike of what he stood for/stands for?

It’s difficult to view money as the thing to limit in a campaign when we tend to view the most important thing voters, so we think, should be able to discern is BS when they see it. [That’s not true in a good number of voters, I’ll allow.]

It’s unfortunate that it takes a lot of money to run for office, so a good man with good ideas from the masses isn’t likely to rise up from among them and get elected as often. I can’t recall anyone in such a position coming to power for a very long time. None of the original Constitutional Framers were from the masses, as I recall.

By corrupt politicians my point is outrageous spending without controls.

 

[MajorRewrite]

What bribes??

The bribe you replied to with your first comment.

The ultra-rich bribe politicians to get big payoffs.

Trump Plans to Protect Methane-Leaking Stripper Wells. This Billionaire Donor Will Benefit.

 

[icanhelp1]

The bribe you replied to with your first comment.

The only protected class worth mentioning is the Biden green energy crowd. How many of Biden’s green energy cronies were made rich with taxpayer dollars.

 

[MajorRewrite]

The only protected class worth mentioning is the Biden green energy crowd. How many of Biden’s green energy cronies were made rich with taxpayer dollars.

Your reply isn’t related to my comment.

 

[icanhelp1]

Your reply isn’t related to my comment.

You're mixed up. What bribe did I respond to? I asked you what bribe, answer the question and not with another question.

 

[Holy_Seduction]

the world’s leading authority on wealth inequality.

A well-intended piece, Major! Damning data. And every paragraph oozes with rich irony.

The liberal commentariat of which Gabriel Z. is part saw billionaires hoover up the wealth of entire nations for decades and said that nothing that really mattered.

This exploding inequality trajectory has been clear since the Reagan-Thatcher wrecking crew dismantled all postwar constraint on capital in the 1980s. But Musk crosses a 13 zero number and only NOW is the alarm rung.

Where was the crisis when a billionaire was worth $500 billion, and austerity, stagnant wages, and crumbling public services gutted the working class as fortunes compounded in the background?

The system that produced this did so in full daylight as the liberal establishment cheered each innovation, disruption, as the market did what markets do.

How is that ‘serious analysis?’

The ‘solution’ is where the article goes from inadequate to genuinely insulting. Correctly noting that extreme wealth corrupts democracy, strangles public discourse, and literally kills people through policy, Zucman’s reply is a 2% wealth tax. Two percent.

On households worth over £100 million.

As if the very oligarchs he admits can buy governments, reshape social media, and defund global health will be reined in by a modest levy administered by those same captured governments.

Musk didn’t buy his way into a quasi-cabinet post because the tax rate on capital gains was too low; he bought it because the entire capitalist state exists to serve his class. No tax reform will ever touch the crucial question of who owns the means of production, and who controls the state that enforces that ownership.

The working class needs no kinder, fairer version of the system that produced Elon Musk. It needs that system ended. The wealth these trillionaires sit atop was not created by them; it was created by workers, generation after generation, whose labor was expropriated under the iron law of capitalist production.

The answer isn’t a charitable redistribution scheme run by G20 committees. It’s expropriation of billionaires — not as a slogan, but as a concrete political program of the international working class, organized independently of every capitalist party and institution.

Until then, the 90% has zero representation. And Gabriel Zucman knows it. Which is why sounds a bit like a man clutching his pearls.

He feels the ground shaking beneath his feet.

 

[MajorRewrite]

You're mixed up. What bribe did I respond to? I asked you what bribe, answer the question and not with another question.

JFC, you truly are an imbecile.

As I already said, you replied to this comment of mine about a bribe:

The ultra-rich bribe politicians to get big payoffs.

Trump Plans to Protect Methane-Leaking Stripper Wells. This Billionaire Donor Will Benefit.

Have someone read it to you if you’re struggling with the words.

 

[dkovic77]

1. Consumption and demand create billionaires.

2. Irresponsible congressional spending, spending more than the revenue streams creates imbalances.

3. Congress's failure to regulate lobbyist is a huge failure.

4. Waste, fraud and abuse facilitated by irresponsible politicians. Failure to properly oversee the distribution of social programs funding is creating wealth inequality, also facilitates freeloading, making surviving on government handouts a comfortable living. Antithetical to healthy economic growth.

5. Raising taxes to compensate for wasteful spending creates wealth inequality.

6. Congress's inability to cap political donations facilitates wealthy politicians or candidates to exercise dominance over our political institutions.

7. Media's constant attempt to destroy fresh political candidates makes it very difficult to elect candidates with fresh ideas. Candidates don't want their names to be dragged through the mud.

8. Globalist politicians enabling millions of migrants from 3rd world countries to enter our country faster than they can assimilate only creates 3rd world pockets to congregate en masse in certain districts diluting the voting power of actual citizens.
9. Suicidal empathy over meritocracy. Globalist promoting nationalism as a pejorative is antithetical to a republic.

10. Failure of congress to initiate term limits.

Most of wealth inequalities can be traced back to congress and corrupt politicians, 5 decades worth. Politicians that make a career out of politics, consumed with self interest over constituent needs, start poor and retire millionaires several times over. More interested in party loyalty over their constituency. Congress has assumed more authority than the constitution allows by the letter of the law.

You have diagnosed your problem. Opening your eyes to the truth is the cure.

But can’t have that… gotta own the libs! And gotta please Pedolf!

You are right on schedule Traitor Tater!

 

[BoredDirtyCommie]

A well-intended piece, Major! Damning data. And every paragraph oozes with rich irony.

The liberal commentariat of which Gabriel Z. is part saw billionaires hoover up the wealth of entire nations for decades and said that nothing that really mattered.

This exploding inequality trajectory has been clear since the Reagan-Thatcher wrecking crew dismantled all postwar constraint on capital in the 1980s. But Musk crosses a 13 zero number and only NOW is the alarm rung.

Where was the crisis when a billionaire was worth $500 billion, and austerity, stagnant wages, and crumbling public services gutted the working class as fortunes compounded in the background?

The system that produced this did so in full daylight as the liberal establishment cheered each innovation, disruption, as the market did what markets do.

How is that ‘serious analysis?’

The ‘solution’ is where the article goes from inadequate to genuinely insulting. Correctly noting that extreme wealth corrupts democracy, strangles public discourse, and literally kills people through policy, Zucman’s reply is a 2% wealth tax. Two percent.

On households worth over £100 million.

As if the very oligarchs he admits can buy governments, reshape social media, and defund global health will be reined in by a modest levy administered by those same captured governments.

Musk didn’t buy his way into a quasi-cabinet post because the tax rate on capital gains was too low; he bought it because the entire capitalist state exists to serve his class. No tax reform will ever touch the crucial question of who owns the means of production, and who controls the state that enforces that ownership.

The working class needs no kinder, fairer version of the system that produced Elon Musk. It needs that system ended. The wealth these trillionaires sit atop was not created by them; it was created by workers, generation after generation, whose labor was expropriated under the iron law of capitalist production.

The answer isn’t a charitable redistribution scheme run by G20 committees. It’s expropriation of billionaires — not as a slogan, but as a concrete political program of the international working class, organized independently of every capitalist party and institution.

Until then, the 90% has zero representation. And Gabriel Zucman knows it. Which is why sounds a bit like a man clutching his pearls.

He feels the ground shaking beneath his feet.

This sums up my thoughts.

Major, why weren't you pressing your party to do something about this? Why do rank and file liberals complain about what's happening but never press the Democrats to do anything about it?