• Rivalarrival@lemmy.todayEnglish
    16 hours

    Damn, that’s a lot less than I thought it would cost for everyone to have equal access to healthcare.

    If it’s that cheap, why are we denying healthcare to anyone?

    • schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works
      15 hours

      Because the United States is an open-air labor camp, and medical care is a stick to make us work.

      Also keeps competition down. I know more than one family where one parent is working a shit job just so their business-owning partner can have medical benefits.

  • seat6@lemmy.zip
    16 hours

    There’s no way these numbers are real, right? I’m absolutely in favor of a wealth tax and the DSA in general; but it can’t possibly add $355,000 in value to each family

    • schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works
      15 hours

      That’s the thing about wealth inequality numbers: they are so incomprehensibly large that you need Carl Sagan to explain them to you.

      For instance:

      Imagine a Cosmic Financial Calendar, where all the money in the planet is distributed along the calendar the same way it is distributed among the population. By June 1st, you would have seen 50% of the wealth, but to see the top 20% of wealth you’d have to wait until the final minutes of December 31st, from 11:54pm. [Edit: I did the math!] but to start seeing the top 32.5% of the wealth, you’d have to wait until December 28th at 8:22 am.

      Or something. Someone can do the math.

      I just wish bellbottoms and turtlenecks would come back into style.

  • ZapBeebz_@lemmy.world
    15 hours

    And I’ll hazard a guess that those 1000 billionaires will still be billionaires. This is a no fucking brainer.

    Not that billionaires should exist, but there will actually be essentially zero impact if we tax them appropriately, so why not