I’ve been to Cuba. It’s exactly what you’d expect from the wonders of communism. Extreme poverty everywhere. The leaders are wealthy and everyone else is poor.
I’ve been to Cuba. It’s exactly what you’d expect from the wonders of communism. Extreme poverty everywhere. The leaders are wealthy and everyone else is poor.
That’s true, and there’s a pretty good reason for that: the obscene wealth of the richest in the U.S. The richest in Sweden don’t have anywhere near $100 billion in net worth, or even $50 billion.
Wealth is irrelevant since we don’t tax wealth. Elon could be broke overnight if Tesla fails. Sweden has billionaires as well. The man who started Ikea was one of the richest men in the world. If Amazon went BK, Bezos would be broke. That is the issue with all your wealth in a single asset of stock. If you don’t like their wealth, we can’t tax it since that is unconstitutional; just don’t buy their products or stock. Encourage your retirement fund not to buy their stock.
https://www.businessinsider.com/ikea-founder-ingvar-kamprad-wealth-family-net-worth-2019-12
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Swedish_billionaires_by_net_worth
That’s why it’s relevant, because it’s not taxed.
Nor should it be. Sweden doesn’t tax wealth.
If Bezos went BK, Do you think we should give a refund when his stock goes down in value? Or should be continue to tax it when it’s converted to income like we have always done.
Wealth is always revelant. If the rich hoarding all the wealth, then the rest of us starve/become homeless/lose our possessions/etc.
Stocks should exist in the first place. They only serve to distribute wealth to the rich, and to those who spend their lives making speculative investments (ie producing nothing of value, and siphoning wealth from the economy).