this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2026
386 points (99.5% liked)

World News

55284 readers
1784 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] JustTesting@lemmy.hogru.ch -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

yes, though to be fair, it's not like this is just sitting in their bank account doing nothing. It's mostly invested somewhere doing stuff to make them richer. So if they were taxed at a fair rate, idk, 90% or so, that would mean less investment, which in turn does help companies grow and pay salaries, R&D etc. They don't send a trillion to a scrooge mcduck bunker on the cayman islands, they create shell companies there that own their stock etc. for them. They could not pay this tax since they just wouldn't have the cash to pay x% of 3.5T. Which would either force them to sell stock to pay tax, potentially tanking the stocks value, or pay the tax directly in stock, making their holdings more government owned over time.

As a socialist, I'm fine with either tbh. just saying this is not cash floating around that can just be spent to tackle humanities problems, if only it was just taxed properly.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Not every investment is in actually making things better for the invested company, many come with "you must fulfill this contract", which is how firms like Blackrock destroy existing companies and get off even richer.

Not to mention when the investment is in treasure bonds, which is esentially lending money to a state/country, which can make certain countries spiral into an unending debt whirpool, thus cutting actual investment the population needs

[–] JustTesting@lemmy.hogru.ch 4 points 2 days ago

oh, definitely, and I'm not saying that they're doing good or anything like that. I mean, the profits for investments have to come out of someone pockets. I'm just saying it's a bit like having a parasite where removal might kill the host if not done carefully, not a free lunch where you just tax them and everyone lived happily ever after. They had a long time to embed themselves in all kinds of systems, and them not paying taxes is kinda built into the expectations of those systems.