[altern8]

Same here.

I don't get the outrage. Our system needs incentives to get people to do great work. If you do one-of-a-kind work, shouldn't you get rewarded proportionally?

There is 1 Amazon. It's not easy to create Amazon from scratch.

[gambiting]

>> If you do one-of-a-kind work, shouldn't you get rewarded proportionally?

Are you allowed to think that the reward that Bezos is reaping isn't proportional to his achievements?

[altern8]

You are.

Who should decide what's proportional, though? Should there be a committee that says, Bezos is capped at X billions, and any money he makes after that gets confiscated?

[wiseowise]

There should be a committee that says if you have wealth in billions you should pay proportionally more in taxes than common populace.

[bpt3]

Good thing the US already has the most progressive tax code in the developed world, and what you described above already happens.

[altern8]

Why punish success..?

[dudefeliciano]

Taxes are not a punishment, a person earning exponentially more than the average person can also afford to pay more taxes, and it will not even begin to affect their quality of life. How is that so hard to understand?

If you don't want to pay taxes i take it you don't want to live in a civilized society, then you are welcome to leave.

[wiseowise]

I’m having serious trouble taking your comments as not a trolling attempt.

[dudefeliciano]

> Who should decide

How about a government that acts for the good of the people, rather than for the companies?

> gets confiscated?

funny way to refer to taxation

[gambiting]

I don't know, but societies seem to determine these kinds of things just fine through democratic processes, usually - why is the tax system where I live structured such that everything below 100k is taxed at 40% but everything above is at 60%? How is that any different? These are just numbers we came up with.

And yeah, I don't have the answer to what the number is for people like Bezos. Maybe there isn't one - maybe he can own whatever amount of money he likes, but every person with wealth above 1BN is banned forever for making politican donations, either personally or through proxies. Enjoy your life with your hard earned money, do whatever you like - but don't use it to influence politics.

Again, I'm not seriously suggesting this - just saying that as societies we determine many things which are right for the greater whole already, why not this? And I really want the answer to be "because we haven't sat down to think about it yet" and not "because Mr Bezos gave us 100M last year for our campaign we so won't be looking into it".

[altern8]

Sure, so influencing politics with money should be outlawed (or perhaps it is already..?). Why not.

That's not the type of conversations I hear, though (including from you). People always seem to focus on punishing people that are more successful. And that can only happen by force, where somebody has to decide what you can and cannot do and then steal whatever you lawfully earned.

[wiseowise]

> proportionally

What is proportional? Shall we crown him god? Allow him to keep slaves? Put him on a pedestal? Do you even know how much is it: a billion? If you strip him off 95% of his wealth, he’ll still have more than you can achieve in your 10 lives. He is disproportionately well compensated.