Basic Income, a new human right

[coffeeshock 20]

Myke;2507076']I really do hope that none of you ever find himself in the position of being 50+ and unemployed (for whatever reason). Then good luck of finding a new job. Probably you wont because there are younger competitors who work for less than you could since you have a family to feed.

It still doesn't justify stealing from others. The destruction of the family unit was another main goal of (cultural) Marxism and they succeeded for the most part' date=' so the people will be dependent on government welfare etc where normaly the family or tribe/community would support their members who are actually in need of it... and if there weren't so many pathetic government rules and taxation, people would have MUCH more money to actually support those people directly and [b']voluntarily[/b], and still have more money left than they have now in the current socialist system where they're coerced by state violence. Charity would be another volutary and therefore moral option, it would still exist without government.

Government and taxation are the problem, not the solution!

"The socialist state justifies itself on the ground that the concentration of power is necessary to do good; but it has never solved the problem of how you ensure that power bestowed to do good will not be employed to do harm, especially when you remove all obstacles to its exercise." -Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.

Edited September 17, 2013 by coffeeshock

[mrcash2009 0]

Myke, in the UK its a phrase called "Im alright jack". ;)

[[frl]myke 14]

@coffeeshock

i'm not going to argue with you. You're so plain wrong on so many levels that it isn't worth the hassle. I just really hope for you that you'll never rely on government and taxation. I really do hope it for you.

[Vigil Vindex 64]

Anarcho-capitalism is an oxymoron. Anarchy implies no state, while capitalism relies on the state to enforce the rules which make a capitalist market possible. Without the state to provide security and enforce the capitalist market, people would just take what they want.

Also there is so much talk of "theft" and "stealing", I find it hard to justify such words. No single individual has a genuine claim to ownership of material over any other individual. Our current cosmologies fall between either god creating the known universe, or the "big bang" event creating the known universe. Both stories preclude humanity, and as such we can lay no claim to ownership of anything we find in the universe. However in light of this knowledge we are still able to dream up the notion of "ownership", and create elaborate arguments to justify this flawed ideology. I hope eventually we will grow up to accept this reality, and accept that the only fair and just solution is to ensure that all living creatures have an equal right to thrive and survive on the resources the universe has seen fit to provide us for gratis.

[coffeeshock 20]

Myke;2507186']@coffeeshock

i'm not going to argue with you. You're so plain wrong on so many levels that it isn't worth the hassle. I just really hope for you that you'll never rely on government and taxation. I really do hope it for you.

Ofc I am wrong' date=' and theft is right, theft and coercion is always moral and always justified. Government is good, government is god.

Oh and FYI, in germany the government is actually PREVENTING me from getting a proper job (above 450€/month)! How about that? It's a little complicated and long story but it's directly related to the FORCED health care in this socialist hell hole...

Anarcho-capitalism is an oxymoron. Anarchy implies no state, while capitalism relies on the state to enforce the rules which make a capitalist market possible. Without the state to provide security and enforce the capitalist market, people would just take what they want.

What?! lmao... a FREE market without government regulations/rules is only possible WITH government rules and regulations?! Haha this is the most ridiculous thing I've read in quite some time... I mean those people here who advocate theft and other immoral actions is one thing which is pretty common nowadays... but this is new... thanks for the lulz haha

Anarcho-communism is the only oxymoron...

I hope eventually we will all grow up to accept the reality of psychopaths running this world, running our lives...

The Road To Hell Is Paved With Good Intentions.

"The object of the will is always the good, and even in the election of evil, it must be proposed to the will under the appearance of good. Anything chosen as a means is therefore viewed under some aspect of goodness [...] Exponentially multiply the number of individual immoral acts, and you have a Republic that collapses from moral decay in a short period of time [...] True liberty is an essential property of objective truth and morality. Therefore there can be no true liberty in a civilization that enshrines moral relativity."

http://www.whatonearthishappening.com/images/stories/woeih/podcast/009/AquinasOnLiberty.pdf

"How does something immoral, when done privately, become moral when it is done collectively? Furthermore, does legality establish morality? Slavery was legal; apartheid is legal; Stalinist, Nazi, and Maoist purges were legal. Clearly, the fact of legality does not justify these crimes. Legality, alone, cannot be the talisman of moral people." -Walter E. Williams

The quiet, Marxist cultural revolution has most likely forever changed the Western civilizations beyond the point of no return.

the Frankfurt School recommended (among other things):

- Encouraging the breakdown of the family

- Dependency on the state or state benefits

- The promotion of excessive drinking

- Control and dumbing down of media

- Huge immigration to destroy identity

- The creation of racism offences

- Continual change to create confusion

- Suppression of consciousness and spirituality (Demoralization)

- The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children

- An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime

One of the school's founding fathers, Willi Munzenberg, stated explicitly that its goal was to:

"...organise the intellectuals and use them to make Western civilisation stink. Only then, after they have corrupted all its values and made life impossible, can we impose the dictatorship of the proletariat."

http://www.abload.de/img/sdaeetoehn.jpg (321 kB)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carroll_Quigley

Edited September 17, 2013 by coffeeshock

[Amra 10]

I hope basic income will become a human right in nearest future. I don't mind if a few pretenders will exploit that if it will help to really poor people. Amazing how some not rich people are eagering to lick capitalist's asses for free. You can watch this everywhere in the internet our days, lol.

[Vigil Vindex 64]

@coffeeshock

Are you blaming socialism/communism for everything? Do you offer any solutions?

We tried this supposed "free market" capitalism with no regulation and look where it has gotten us, massive debt, toxic derivatives, foreclosures for the common workers, and bailouts for "too big to fail" bankers, socialism for the wealthy. It's obvious if any kind of capitalist market is to exist then some form of regulation and state is going to be needed. Do you honestly think capitalism can exist without a state to enforce it? Have you seen Mad Max?

Are you trying to say the world is ran by mad men and we should just accept it without discussion? You claim the Marxist cultural experiment has changed western civilization forever as if it was some foreign invasion, Marx and Engels where German economists, part of western civilization to begin with.

We are here to discuss solutions to problems, constructively. Rather than sneering at each others opinions can we have a constructive debate?

[coffeeshock 20]

@coffeeshock

Are you blaming socialism/communism for everything? Do you offer any solutions?

We tried this supposed "free market" capitalism with no regulation and look where it has gotten us, massive debt, toxic derivatives, foreclosures for the common workers, and bailouts for "too big to fail" bankers, socialism for the wealthy. It's obvious if any kind of capitalist market is to exist then some form of regulation and state is going to be needed. Do you honestly think capitalism can exist without a state to enforce it? Have you seen Mad Max?

Are you trying to say the world is ran by mad men and we should just accept it without discussion? You claim the Marxist cultural experiment has changed western civilization forever as if it was some foreign invasion, Marx and Engels where German economists, part of western civilization to begin with.

We are here to discuss solutions to problems, constructively. Rather than sneering at each others opinions can we have a constructive debate?

No I am blaming YOU for supporting an immoral system which we now call socialism/communism/marxism. A few psychopaths at the top can't do much on their own, they have to brainwash YOU to support their goals... and you did all throughout history until today...

A true free market only existed in America for less than 100 years, it only "failed" because the original republic became a socialist democracy with the act of 1871 after the war and everyone became a slave with the 14th amendment.

Everything you described was the result of government regulation and control, what we see today is only "crony capitalism" or corporatism, not real free market capitalism and as I have proven with direct confessions and simple logic, the rich psychopaths want socialism which is only possible with government force because only government has the monpoly on violence. Very simple logic really...

Corporatism (communism) is not capitalism. It's the destruction of the free market and the creation of corporate monopolies achieved through the regulatory and monopoly power of strong central government.

So in the end government itself will become the ultimate monopoly corporation, which is communism by definition. So leftists always fear monopolies, yet demand the ultimate monopoly corporation to enslave all of us in a collectivist society which many of you on here also support. The irony is hilarious...

Mad Max is Hollywood FICTION, did you know that? Do you suck up Hollywood propaganda and myths? Have you ever studied the human brain and psychopathy?

Marx and Engels were also psychopaths working for the psychopathic banksters... their anti-human/nature drivel tells alot about them...

And YOU are the only ones here who demand that psychopaths keep running this world and rob the peoples wealth in the name of "the common good".

"This new and complete Revolution we contemplate can be defined in a very few words. It is outright world-socialism, scientifically planned and directed..." - H. G. Wells, The New World Order, 1939, Fabian Socialist

Without governments monopoly on violence every single large corporation would be nothing but a toothless tiger...

None of you could explain to me how you can give someone else a "right" which is not a right and which you don't actually have...

"What makes it unique is that Marxism / Socialism / Communism retains the moral cover of helping everyone by enslaving everyone. This is a tremendously powerful rationalization for the psyches of the power lusters, because they need the rationalization of morality to justify widescale murder in reality. [...] Marxism is uniquely a system designed to appeal to people who are predisposed to delusions of grandeur and power lust, who feel they are entitled to rule over the rest of us. [...] It's almost as if Marxism was designed to seek out all the psychopaths or potential (secondary) psychopaths in society, and provide them the moral rationalization they need for killing, destroying and ruling."

http://robbservations.blogspot.de/2013/04/the-appeal-of-marxism-is-to-psychopaths.html

Edited September 17, 2013 by coffeeshock

[scrim 1]

You know coffee, you've really gone way over the top in terms of stupidity when you push me to the point where I agree with Amra (no offence Amra, it's just that we've had our differences so to speak). There is obviously no point in debating with you any further, as I don't find it very amusing to see you descend lower and lower in your circle of self degradation.

I'll just you with these final notes: Unlike Myke, I do hope that you for some time find yourself unemployed at age 50+, as I doubt that anything smoother than that can make some basic sense penetrate into your head. And second, it's bad enough when people throw the Nazi comparisons around like it's confetti. It's even worse when Germans do it, because of all the people in the world, you lot should've learnt the biggest lesson.

[b00tsy 28]

The top 100 richest people have enough money to end poverty in a blink of an eye.

http://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressrelease/2013-01-19/annual-income-richest-100-people-enough-end-global-poverty-four-times\

The 10.000 richest people in the world have enough money to change human reality as we know it. Every single living soul on this planet could live a fortunate life. With the wealth of those criminals in suit properly invested technology would take a different turn and would be used to create a better peaceful and stable world. Yet the system of greed lets that hand full of invividuals live as gods and rule the world while the world stays in a state of missery and destruction.

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

The top 100 richest people have enough money to end poverty in a blink of an eye.

The global money supply is about $60 trillion. (Economists call this figure the M3 value; it includes much more than currency.) Say that we take it all—which means that you and Bill Gates would have nothing in the bank—and then distribute it equally among every individual in the world, about 6.8 billion people. Each man, woman, and child would receive about $9000. So, if your household now has less than $9000 per person, you would gain. If you have more, you would lose.

http://www.freemoneyfinance.com/2009/09/all-the-money-in-the-world-divided-equally.html

Enjoy your $9000 ROFL, within a few years we would be back in the same situation we have now after temporarily being reduced to 'equal misery' with all industry and commerce failed because no one could afford to buy anything (see the Soviet Union - didn't work out, did it?) . Even in the 3rd world where $9000 is substantial, there wouldn't be anything to spend it on because there wouldn't be any imports from more productive nations. It best if people try to work with reality, not against it. I would suggest you read some economics and see just how 'money makes the world go around'. It's something left wing dreamers constantly fail to understand.

It's nice to dream but as usual on this forum things are never, ever thought out properly and the consequences ignored. If you actually wanted a better world what you would argue for is a workable method of returning some people to a self sustainable way of life and population control. The M3 value above was in 2009, with the ever increasing population in 20 years just imagine what your share would be when there are another billion on the planet.

[coffeeshock 20]

You know coffee, you've really gone way over the top in terms of stupidity when you push me to the point where I agree with Amra (no offence Amra, it's just that we've had our differences so to speak). There is obviously no point in debating with you any further, as I don't find it very amusing to see you descend lower and lower in your circle of self degradation.

I'll just you with these final notes: Unlike Myke, I do hope that you for some time find yourself unemployed at age 50+, as I doubt that anything smoother than that can make some basic sense penetrate into your head. And second, it's bad enough when people throw the Nazi comparisons around like it's confetti. It's even worse when Germans do it, because of all the people in the world, you lot should've learnt the biggest lesson.

I understand the overwhelming facts presented are too much for your programmed world view where immoral actions are somehow magically justified. Hence your mental schism ie cognitive dissonance...

As described by KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov:

"...exposure to true information does not matter anymore. A person who was demoralized is unable to assess true information. The facts tell nothing to him. Even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents, with pictures; even if I take him by force to the Soviet Union and show him [a] concentration camp, he will refuse to believe it, until he [receives] a kick in his fan-bottom. When a military boot crashes his... then he will understand. But not before that. That's the [tragedy] of the situation of demoralization."

Demoralization, getting rid of morality was the whole main of this global brainwashing process, and they've succeeded for the most part, that's why all of you support and demand theft to "help" others or for "the greater good", because you live in constant fear which is based in our primitive reptilian-brain (R-complex). They've essentially degraded the whole world into an animalistic low form of consciousness, where everyone is begging for more external governnment control regardless of morality. Any form of emotional right brain intelligence has been shut down.

So you basically deny the existence of Nazi-germany, Soviet Russia, China, Cuba, Cambodia, North Korea etc etc... you deny the scientific and common sense fact of genetic psychopathy (successful psychopaths in gov and business) therefore denying any possibility of conspiracies and tyrannies... lol talk about a "circle of self degradation"... you're delusional and naive if you really believe that psychopathy is just a theory and all people are born equally good and governments are always trustworthy no matter how powerful they get...

Well I personally don't hope you'll ever find yourself in a gulag some time in the future, but if you do, you'll deserve it... why? Because otherwise you'll never learn a lesson in objective morality...

Brave men like Alexander Solzhenitsyn had to suffer this horrible fate and afterwards came to the same conclusion:

"We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward." -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago

"To reject this inhuman Communist ideology is simply to be a human being. Such a rejection is more than a political act. It is a protest of our souls against those who would have us forget the concepts of good and evil."

—Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Warning to the West

"We have placed too much hope in politics and social reforms, only to find out that we were being deprived of our most precious possession: our spiritual life."

—Alexander Solzhenitsyn, A World Split Apart

You see? You people have forgotten the concepts of good and evil... you support psychopathy and demand that thugs in uniform with guns go out and STEAL from your fellow man or punish them for victimless "crimes" like smoking weed or not wearing a seatbelt... it's immoral and disgusting!

The end goal of socialism ultimately is this:

"Under Socialism, you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live, you would have to live well." -George Bernard Shaw, Fabian Socialist

What you all basically claim is this:

"THEFT is a basic human right"

I'll leave you guys with this from a true human being...

"Laws change. Conscience doesn't." -Sophie Scholl

Edited September 18, 2013 by coffeeshock

[Vigil Vindex 64]

^^ It's like reading something straight out of the McCarthy era. We leftists are thieving psychopaths apparently because we feel the state should protect those who can't protect themselves. You can throw accusations of psychopathy and immorality all you want, it still doesn't change the fact that we are here to discuss solutions to problems, not to demean and undermine everyone else's position with baseless accusations and rhetoric. Who is more immoral, the person who walks past those in need of help, or the person who stops to give their time to help? Are you so brainwashed and psychotic that you cannot accept that those with leftist political views are not some evil, but are in fact people who have given much thought to their views and have arrived at those views because they want to help those in need?

PS. On the topic of "theft", for anyone to steal anything from you, you first have to steal it from the planet. No living creature has a just claim to ownership of any material on this fine planet. The only justified solution is equal share for all.

Edited September 18, 2013 by ssechaud

[maturin 12]

Solzhenytsin never gave two shits about the tax rate, whether flat, regressive or progressive. Bringing his moralism up in such a context just goes to show what Russians mean when they call Americans 'soulless.' Equating taxation (which predates Western Civilization and the globe-conquering states and societies that never would have existed without it) with the state terrorism employed by the Bolshevik is pure, unadulterated idiocy.

Oh, and be careful when you post about Solzhenytsin and morality, because he believed that the best form Russia could take after communism was a magical Orthodox forest kingdom for white people with God giving orders directly to the new Tsar.

[spooky lynx 73]

Solzhenitsyn? That jail fink? Oh come on...

[b00tsy 28]

Matter, it´s not a dream, it is a disgusting fact of our system.

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

Matter, it´s not a dream, it is a disgusting fact of our system.

Well I'm all for a better system - how are you going to do it? Sharing out all the money in the world so we each get around $9000 each doesn't seem to be the way forward? Your method simply makes everyone equally poor and would lead to global economic collapse, then what? Where the hell do we go from there - back to the same system we have now in about 5 years?

Your view was commented on many years ago and was eventually proven correct by what happened to communist nations:

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill

That is why I say you are dreaming, you need an idea that makes sense. Simply saying life isn't fair, rich people have too much lets take it all is far too simplistic, we had that experiment in the USSR. You need an idea that will work in the long term.

Edited September 18, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[maturin 12]

Can we stop talking as if the only two countries in the world are the US and the USSR, bringing up progressively ill-advised one-liners by famous personages ill-suited to the topic at hand?

And if you say that the USSR proved the unworkable nature of socialism, you're taking advantage of the fact that the term that has fifteen definitions, and you're not a serious person.

As for Winston Churchill, let his unelectable imperialist ass go use poison gas on the primitive commie tribes of Sweden.

[b00tsy 28]

Well I'm all for a better system - how are you going to do it? Sharing out all the money in the world so we each get around $9000 each doesn't seem to be the way forward? Your method simply makes everyone equally poor and would lead to global economic collapse, then what? Where the hell do we go from there - back to the same system we have now in about 5 years?

Your view was commented on many years ago and was eventually proven correct by what happened to communist nations:

That is why I say you are dreaming, you need an idea that makes sense. Simply saying life isn't fair, rich people have too much lets take it all is far too simplistic, we had that experiment in the USSR. You need an idea that will work in the long term.

I would love to share my indepth vision of a new system, but my experience is that most people do not accept to understand it. They usually keep referring to old systems like socialism or communism instead of getting out of their conditioned tunnel vission and be open for new idea's and way's. Besides that, English is not my first language, I woud express myself different in my own language. You quoting Churchill makes me decide to not bother.

[spooky lynx 73]

Free market you say? Okay we had it in Russia in 90's, do you know what does it mean really? No salary obligations, no production because resale of imported goods and sale of natural resources abroad is most profitable. Many industrial and scientific branches were destroyed - they were not enough profitable so nobody wanted to deal with it without any state interference. I see that all those who cry about ole good free market and blame some state or socialist regulations hadn't lived a day in the truly free market conditions...

[Amra 10]

When I hear "free market" I always wonder for how long would it stay "free" without regulations until few huge corporations will make it "unfree" again.

[instagoat 133]

Picking apart all this conspiracy "The world is too complicated for me so I make it simple by pretending there is an overarching agenda and supporting that by quotemining people and interpreting socialist paintings" humbug is difficult to do on a one by one basis. Coffeeshock is demonstrating one thing conspiracy theorists always do, throwing out a -ton- of "facts", largely unsupported by any evidence bar said quotes and the occasional book written by an "insider", and leaving the counter argumenter gasping for breath as he is suffocated in a flood of information that ultimately turns out to be hollow and unimpressive.

The free market is not your friend, neither is total government and regulation. Going to extremes on either side will lead to bloodshed. Legalizing (or de-regulating, as the PC term happens to be) corporate total liberty results in inhumane treatment of people too. Especially given the nature of a market as thoroughly saturated as ours. A company is, ultimately, like a tiny state in itself when totally freed of its legal boundaries within a nations system of law. It has a government, it has a working class and it has trade relationships (This obviously is oversimplifying things, but you get the Idea.). Contrary to the state, which is NOT to be confused with a government but the social contract between the citizens of a nation in essence, which exists to support, protect and better the lives of its citizens, a company is NOT bound by any ethical standards by default, but only its goal of producing profits for its shareholders.

Company ethics are in fact not standards native to the concept of economics in a company, but rather are a fixed part (at least in our system.) of Corporate Identity and Public Relations. The reason why chemical companies do not dump their waste into Rivers anymore is NOT because the bosses were cuddly wuddly treehuggers who just happened to like the river to be blue, rather than rust red, but pressure by the public and its elected politicians to stop fucking with the environment. This in turn produced a PR factor (green-ness) which got turned around by PR specialists and now is on the front of such half-baked do-goody programs such as the green food industry.

And one shouldn't forget that the concept of propaganda and public relations as coined by Bernays in his book "Propaganda" was first formulated with the eye on business, rather than political interests (in fact, Bernays was quoted as being "shocked" at the fact that after the war it turned out that Goebbels had been a fan of his work, and had used the concepts outlined in the book as his playbook for organizing the german propaganda machine. This was what turned the term negative, and resulted in the post war switch to "public relations" over the previously used term.).

There is a difference between a corporation and a genuinely pro-society business, and it is a matter of scale and involvement of the people profiting from it. In a business, the people who invest in it are directly tied to their investment and often directly participate in it. In large corporations, liquidity is provided by a massive pool of anonymous shareholders (anonymous to the public, at least.) whose only involvement with the company is their held piece of paper and nothing else. There are also much larger sums of money involved, making the individual shareholder unless they themselves are a massive entity by scale of investment rather insignificant. Because of this, their lack of attachment to the workforce and the company as a whole, as well as the anonymity among each other produces the effect that they are much more focused on the balance sheet rather than what is actually good for the physical location that the company is placed at.

Case in point, Nokias move from Finland to Germany to Romania for tax cut reasons, on the pressure of their board (which is elected by the investors, not the people producing value for the company, namely the employees.).

Another problem is the nature of the money market, which by its natural dynamics is prone to produce bubbles and busts as well as massive surges especially in developing fields, which usually do not subside until a market is thoroughly saturated. But even then, PR problems can spell doom for a company. Because of this, people can actually work and produce nothing of effective value. Billions of dollars were invested in the US into the housing market, people worked, and you might as well have given the workers the money and forced them to smoke it in their pipes: money has -zero- inherent and stable value. The worth of what you earn is not defined by you, it is not defined by the government, it is not defined by the banks but it is defined by the market. The arbitrary number on your bank account does not represent the value of your work or the absence of value in your work, it represents a fixed fraction of a constantly changing pool of value that spells doom to any oversimplificating Idea of "People should just be paid for their honest work."

Because by that Idea you should pay people not for what they produce, but rather for how expensive their work is for their mental and physical health, as well as their lifetime. That in turn would mean that a person with a mental-physical disability would need to be paid as much as a healthy worker doing a similar job, but with the disabled person working half the time of the healthy person because simply by nature of their disability, the job is more exerting on them.

This is economic bullshit, but as far as humanity and kindness are concerned, more humane than any "elbows out and let the market rule" world views. Those by nature subject the individual to the total pressure of the market, and because of the huge imbalances on the global market would produce extraordinary stresses that would bowl many people right out of the pool and into the ditch. Welfare is NOT put in place by parasites to feed other parasites, it is put in place by the capable to help the incapable.

The inherent doublethink in conspiracist world views, especially with regards to economics where they declare the german welfare state "Communist" and "Evil" is at times insufferable, but thankfully not a major opinion, because otherwise we would be in a hellish world reminiscent of the era of manchester capitalism.

Also, if you want to suggest that communism or any form of dictatorship of any class over another class is a solution, you haven't learned any lessons, as a preemptive word here.

My two extremely muddled cents.

Edited September 22, 2013 by InstaGoat

[[frl]myke 14]

I think this fits pretty well in this thread:

http://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2

[Vigil Vindex 64]

^^ That video is actually pretty good. Shows clearly the scale of the problem. Thanks for sharing.

PS. I really think we should seriously start considering a law that prevents people from having more than a billion. Who would argue that a billion is not enough?

[[frl]myke 14]

^^ That video is actually pretty good. Shows clearly the scale of the problem. Thanks for sharing.

PS. I really think we should seriously start considering a law that prevents people from having more than a billion. Who would argue that a billion is not enough?

I don't care if people are superrich and have more (even much more) than a billion. I hope they enjoy it and i'm glad for them. The problem is that there are also super poor people. I'm not talking about third world, i'm talking about those sleeping under a bridge in your town/region. Also those who actually do work hard 100% and the paycheck still doesn't cover their expenses. Those earning always less and less while their boss is getting richer in huge steps.