"Every time one person amasses a fortune worth a billion pounds, we are witnessing a policy failure."

Damn straight.



I'm a capitalist in general, as in I see no advantage to having the state own the means of production.

However having a cap on wealth makes sense IMHO. What that cap should be I'm not sure. A billion is clearly absurd.

@sillystring exactly. I would not want the government to own the means of production, just like I would not want a single corporate behemoth to own and control them.

It doesn't really matter which behemoth owns it all. Power corrupts.

We must avoid behemoths owning it all (or a large part of it all), regardless if they happen to be governments, companies, individuals, NGOs, or, you know, cats.

@sillystring just to clarify: I am not against governments, companies, individuals, NGOs, or cats existing or owning *some* of the means of production and having *some* influence.

But that influence needs to be checked and that ownership needs to be limited in the scope. Owning a few bakeries? Fine. Owning a substantial enough number of bakeries to influence health policy in a negative way? Very much not fine.

And yes, "substantial enough" and "negative way" are vague. Because life's vague.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Русская нода социальной сети "Мастодонт", части Fediverse - всемирной федерации социальных сетей. Зона общения, свободная от рекламы и шпионажа, теперь и в России.