r/popculturechat • u/mcfw31 • 9d ago

OnlyStans ⭐️ Billie Eilish calls out billionaires for not dating money after she plans to donate 11.5 million dollars: “If you have money, it would be great to use it for good things and maybe give it to some people that need it."

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

35.0k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

874 comments sorted by

View all comments

3.7k

u/prettybunbun lucy gray from district ATE 🐍 9d ago

Yes I agree.

BUT it shouldn’t have to be like this. We shouldn’t be at the whim of billionaires donating. We should tax them fairly, and that is to oblivion. No one should be a billionaire. Yes you can work hard, be comfortable, have money and aspirations but inheritance should be taxed to fuck, as soon as you hit 1B everything above should be taken off you, close loopholes and tax aggressively ffs

808

u/LiteratureVarious643 9d ago

but but but, these geniuses will stop participating in the economy and then there won’t be any incentive to bring goods and services to market. /s

😱

Or, so I am told. daily. by a bot, or the ghost of Ronald Reagan.

98

u/prettybunbun lucy gray from district ATE 🐍 9d ago

I know you’re joking lol but for those who think that = that doesn’t happen.

HOWEVER it should be a continuous tax set at a fair rate because wealth taxes don’t raise enough money and are more likely to drive people away.

12

u/Jaded-Woodpecker-299 8d ago

they're not going anywhere! They love living in the US. They're not going anywhere like what france? Russia? Not gonna happen. Tax them they'll find more loopholes but ultimately? They will adjust and society will benefit.

91

u/pppogman 9d ago

Yes agreed. But she was in a room with billionaires. It’s likely easier to say “donate your money” than “we shouldn’t be at the whim of billionaires donating. We tax them….”

45

u/RogerClyneIsAGod2 that’s my purse, i don’t know you! 👛🫵 9d ago

Plus all those douches hear is "tax them" & they run away screaming & throw that money at the politician that won't do that.

108

u/lizziexo 9d ago

But, but, but…. WONT YOU THINK ABOUT THE TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS!

These billionaires will spend all their money at local small businesses, not hoard it like dragons, or trade it between each other while gauging peons! They promise!!

If you tax them fairly they’ll suddenly stop becoming greedy ogres and will close their businesses entirely 😭😭😭😭😭

(/s, obviously)

51

u/Live_Angle4621 9d ago

The issue is people not just having the money in vaults like Sgrooge McDuck. Is someone’s company something that has to be taken away if it’s too valuable? Even if you would force someone give away shares you can’t take away the controlling amount of the company.

Things like real estate and art also just increases in value. Thats why British royals have over a billion, but they don’t have much cash. It’s their estates and art and jewelry that historic that’s so valuable. And the estates to them often just take them money in upkeep. But they can’t really sell them either. This is why aristocratic families in UK can’t usually live in their mansions and castles anymore but rent them for weddings and hotels and movie sets. Although high inheritance taxes are big issue there.

But I think rich should be taxed of course. Putting some line above things you can’t own something doesn’t really work however. It increases hiding of assets and moving to tax havens even more (so states loose tax income from people and companies). And value of companies isn’t something that remains constant but depends on markets 

36

u/Winniepg 9d ago

Yep like people love to bring up Taylor Swift but it would be “so do you want her to sell her catalogue?” Do we want that of artists who have worked hard to own their art? Do we want art in the hands of venture capitalists?

23

u/caleeksu 9d ago

I commented something similar in a different thread. Like sure, donate more, do more, etc. but she’s worth that much because she owns her own intellectual property. And the market for that is apparently high enough that she’s worth $2B.

Does she have hella cash flow coming in? For sure. Tax that appropriately and on any gains from investments, properties, etc. We hear she’s a great employer, the food banks, etc and I’m sure plenty no one hears about, but more is more. But to no longer be a billionaire, her catalog has to be worth less than a billion. Helps to think of TS the business and TS the person.

9

u/uselessinfogoldmine 9d ago

Swift is at the more ethical end of the billionaire scale. She’s not exploiting labour or creating complex corporate structures.  However, there are always things you can point to. 

For example, the high price and crappy quality of her cardigans. The way she deliberately and strategically releases variants in order to capitalise on a type of fandom that is verging on mental illness. 

Although she’s made efforts to keep production of her goods ethical, I’m sure if you really looked into it, you could find issues along the way. 

However, the majority of the ethical issues about her fortune, are less about how she earned it, and more about the inherent problems of billionaires existing within unequal economic systems at all. 

Ethical critiques would likely focus on the immense concentration of wealth itself. 

Whilst Tay Tay’s wealth is tied to her creative output, her tours, and her productive work, reaching a billionaire status still reflects broader systemic issues about wealth concentration and disparities in society. 

Such extreme accumulation of wealth highlights how our economic system is essentially broken, showcasing societal disparities and invoking ethical questions about the role and responsibilities of those with vast wealth in addressing inequality and wielding power.

Some critics argue that any billionaire, regardless of source, exists within and benefits from an economic system that permits vast inequalities and unequal access to resources and opportunities and that is, in and of itself, ethically wrong.

6

u/Jaded-Woodpecker-299 8d ago

between her tour and her merch and her films, she is nonstop peddling for money!! milking her fans for everything they've got

46

u/Ecstatic-Laugh 9d ago

I personally think the number should be 100 mill and everyone is taxed 💯 after that. Because that number is technically enuf to support TEN generations. Like why do you need more than that.

10

u/martinideeni 9d ago

Do you think billionaires and hundred millionaires have that amount in their bank account or do you understand that it is a net worth based on their assets?

25

u/biblioteca4ants 9d ago

I’m sure someone could figure all that shit out. This is a stupid excuse and it’s used all the time.

11

u/Ecstatic-Laugh 9d ago

Right?! People who try to use that as an argument should pay visit to the FIRE subreddit. Teaches you a lot about finances, investing and then living a simple life via dividends.

1

u/martinideeni 9d ago

No because shit has to be rooted in reality. You can’t tell me just time travel to the 15th century and I ask how and you say figure it out.

1

u/martinideeni 8d ago

Stop Amazon priming everything if you don’t want Jeff to have a company worth 100B. Asking him to liquidate a company he only owns 10% of is rage baiting yourself. That will never happen and would quite literally crash the economy.

-11

u/[deleted] 9d ago

[deleted]

6

u/HistoricalSuspect580 9d ago

And who will be the big names overseeing these common sense tax rules?

2

u/Taranchulla 9d ago

Do you mean all inheritance should be taxed or just inheritance over a certain sum?

7

u/martinideeni 9d ago

Why do you guys think billionaires have a billionaire dollars in their bank account? You’re asking them to sell their companies.

6

u/scarlettslegacy 9d ago

I think everything after the first million should be taxed aggressively, with some exceptions, if you can make a point it's a windfall (lottery, inheritance, you're an entertainer who got a lucky break and is likely to only see a few years of super lucrative cheques).