• stoy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    10 days ago

    That is increadibly hard to do.

    1. How do you define what goes into that 1 million of allowed wealth? If I buy a house worth 950000, would I only be allowed to save 50000.
    2. what about if the house increase in value so that it is worth 2 million, should I just accept that I loose 1 million? What about stocks?
    3. Inflation or Deflation, when/how will you update that limit?
    • frank@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 days ago

      I agree with your take on this. I think 1M is way too low. But 1 Billion… It’s a bit easier to imagine the “you can’t or the dictatorship will seize something” idea.

      The reality is that the wealthiest people usually influence the most

    • Little8Lost@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 days ago

      I would probably also include the wealth one owns and not just money (because thats useless, they would just use a different currency) and set it to like 40-50 houses in value. If they own a company that gets bigger the country gets shares

      50 Houses might seem a lot in value (especially depending on what kind of building) but it already would distribute a lot of wealth + allowing the dream of being filthy rich with less consequences to the rest of the population

      Because its just an idea i dont think about the specifics of the exact limit and such