Chriskmee

It's clear you don't know how things work at all. You can't expect to tax someone billions every year and not have to sell the thing causing such a huge tax burden. This isn't an infinite money glitch, the loan thing can only go so far.

Also, unrealized gains are a real thing, stocks go up and down, and the change in value is unrealized until it's sold. If a stock goes up $100 that isn't $100 in my pocket, because tomorrow it could go down $200. If you want to tax these unrealized gains, then you should be paying out the unrealized losses as well. You would also be screwing up the middle class retirement funds, so thanks for that.

Keep projecting, how do those boots taste?

Yeah, I think we both know that will never work.

What about the middle class that relies on stocks to retire? If you aren't aware, retirement accounts are usually mostly stocks, do we tax the middle class retirement money?

I think your last paragraph is pretty telling, just blindly supporting anything that hurts billionaires simply because they are billionaires, no matter how unfair or unjust it is, or even his bad the consequences would be for the country.

I think there is a reason the most successful companies are from the US, you would have them move their bushes elsewhere that's more supportive of their size?

Amazon does invest most of their profits back into the business, that is why they were operating with basically no profit. They still paid plenty of taxes though, like payroll taxes, that aren't based on profit.

Then apply income tax or something on loans against stock over a certain amount, but I'm guessing that isn't enough for you? I'm guessing like everyone else here the only solution is to tax them so much they aren't a billionaire anymore, forcefully taking their company away from them in the process.

Because the price you quoted wouldn't be nearly enough if we built in expensive cities, it has to be built in cheap to build areas for that number to make sense.

You realize rich people do pay income taxes just like the rest of us, right?

It's called income tax, I'm the one making the income, so what should the company pay it? The company pays taxes also, like a payroll tax.

The only acceptable way to use that much money is to reinvest it in the society that enabled you to become a billionaire.

Bill Gates seems to be doing a decent job of that, I'm glad he made the choices he has to redistribute his wealth, and I'm also glad it's his choice.

It would cost around 20 billion dollars to end homelessness in the US, why should people be allowed to have net worths of 100 billion+ when it would only cost 1/5th of that to provide everyone with a home?

I really doubt it's that simple. Where are these houses being built, in the middle of nowhere I suspect? How many homeless people want to move there? Will there be jobs out there? What about electricity, gas, and Internet?

So how do we calculate wealth if it isn't based on what the market says it's worth? If we are going to tax Musk on his wealth, most of which is stock, how do you figure out the "real" wealth to tax?

I don't get why this obsession with undefined "risk" is so important. What's the absolute worst case scenario? Their business shuts down and they have to go work for a wage like everyone else?

The risk is losing their life savings or having debt the likes of which makes your student debt look like nothing. If the risk means nothing to you, you should try it, make a great business that follows your ideals, and if you fail no big deal, right?

Economically, China, Cuba, and Vietnam operate under Marxist governments using different approaches to planned economies that place a large emphasis on worker power within businesses

As I suspected, your examples are of countries that are not exactly great places to live, and where US companies go to get the cheapest labor they can. They have worse workers rights than the US

Nowhere on earth aiming for socialism isn't in a process of active struggle against the global capitalist powers-that-be, and that struggle looks very different under different circumstances

It sounds like we really shouldn't be trying for that if it only works when everyone does it. It's one thing to try and change a country, but to change the whole world? Might as well be impossible.

I don't just want the US to change to the Chinese model or something, but I do want an economic model much closer to the examples I've given here, though substantially adjusted to the conditions of the US (and the need for the US to make reparations for imperialism).

I just can't picture how that would look though, which is why I asked for the examples. It sounds like there really isn't a great example of where you think the US should go?

So basically what you are saying is the more successful a business is, the more of it we should steal away from the rightful owners?