• Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Fine then, create a mechanism that lets people spend shares at the grocery store. Some people will spend all or most of theirs and others will focus on accumulating more, which will result in a repeat of wealth inequity. I think dangling a big number with a dollar sign in front of it as a marketing tool is playing to the spending mentality, which bothers me. I would rather inspire people to look for an end of the scarcity era, when money will be either mostly or entirely irrelevant. I think making profits and greed obsolete through innovation is more realistic than proposing to take wealth away from the class that has almost all the power to resist that.

    • cmhe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      Sure, but you might be missing the point of the post in the picture. This isn’t about solving wealthy inequality, it is about demonstrating how bad the inequality is.

      You have to develop better tax policies to fight it, policies that takes more money from the rich and feeds it into the government, for it to redistribute where it is needed most, the social security and welfare services.

      • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I know the point of the reposted post was to show how bad wealth inequality is, but I’m pretty sure the point of “This is how we should be selling redistribution” is about actually doing redistribution.