@nerdman Poor people often times don't even have a choice in what they buy as they will likely pick the cheapest option not that has anything to do with what I was talking about. You're correct in some sense thought that society should not permit the existence of billionaires. They should be taxed out of existence. @uu

@terryenglish @uu

You don't tax people out of existence. You just get them to move their value to where it's not taxed as heavily, and then you don't have investments and real poverty explodes.

@nerdman America must have been really poor during the 1950's then when the tax rate was much higher for individuals and corporations. @uu

@terryenglish @uu

You mean right after the rest of the industrialized world wrecked itself and there weren't places to make industrial goods at other than USA?

@nerdman That's not entirely true but alright the 1960's then after all countries in Europe were largely rebuilt. Point remains the same. @uu

@terryenglish @uu

You mean when industrial production started getting moved to Japan then Korea then China, Mexico, etc because USA was too expensive?

@nerdman @terryenglish @uu >because USA was too expensive

is that why

@fluffy @uu @terryenglish

What other reason could there be? Spite? That's not how getting rich works.

@nerdman @terryenglish @uu profit-seeking does not appropriately model all behavior

the stonetoss Burgers? comic comes to mind as an obvious example

@fluffy @uu @terryenglish

Oh of course. But if you're getting rich, profit seeking must necessarily be a very important behavior, no?

@nerdman @terryenglish @uu A non sequitor? I'm simply suggesting that the motives behind moving around labor are more nuanced than "americans charge more"

@fluffy @uu @terryenglish

I'm suggesting that profit is the most important, because if you don't do things with profit in mind, you don't profit, and you don't get rich(er).

#GetWokeGoBroke comes to mind.

@nerdman @terryenglish @uu only in the sense that all human behavior ultimately is about profits

and at that level of generality, i'm not sure how meaningful the statement is

@fluffy @uu @terryenglish

When we're talking about taxing billionaires out of existence and what would happen if you actually tried that, thinking about human behavior is important.

@nerdman @terryenglish @uu what if they move around production as much to prohibit labor organization as they do to minimize wages paid

@nerdman That would happen if a country decided to stop facilitating the ability for those people to move their money elsewhere. Placing restrictions on capital flight. Again they are only able to do that not only because we allow it but we help the process. @uu @fluffy

@terryenglish @uu @fluffy

You know how you get capital flight? By trying to stop it.

@nerdman We used to have restrictions on capital flight prior to the 1970's. Which coincides interestingly with Nixon's visit to China a little after they were dismantled. Weird coincidence. @uu @fluffy

@terryenglish @uu @fluffy

If they kept restrictions it would just mean richer peoples in other places. What Nixon did that REALLY fucked up everything was ending the gold standard.

@fluffy America had powerful unions back in the day. Even in the private sector. So yes spite is definitely part of the equation. @nerdman @uu

@terryenglish @fluffy @uu

The Irishman is a good watch.