This is such a naive viewpoint. Let's say that people are not allowed to have more than 10 million dollars, but corporations are. Then it wouldn't be Zuckerberg's money, it would simply be Facebook's, wielded by Zuckerberg.

I hope you can see the ridiculousness is saying that corporations should be limited in wealth as well, but even if you can't, let's assume they are limited the same. Now it becomes easier to buy them off, because they are comparably smaller.

The only logical solution is to allow both corporations and individuals to accumulate as much wealth as they are able to. Rich people aren't the problem, corrupt people are. Instead of trying to make rich corrupt people less rich, why don't we try to make them less corrupt instead?

We should just tax income over $10 million at 90% for both people and corporations. Maybe then we could have an actual healthcare system

> We should just tax income over $10 million at 90% for both people and corporations.

People - maybe. But why corporations? Isn’t that double taxation? The only way money leaves a corporation is through people which will be taxed eventually.

As for the healthcare system, it doesn’t need more money. It needs an extreme regulation and red tape shake up. We could have vastly better healthcare today for the same amount of money that’s already there if not for the bureaucratic mess and an army of administrators tending to it.

If you don't tax corporations then people will just buy their mansions and yachts through the company.

Double taxation already happens today.

Your argument is founded on naivete.

Of course doing something halfway would not accomplish much.

Just who is buying off these corporations if no one has vast wealth?

Foreign entities? Of course, we should ban that as long as we’re at it. Next you’ll have people using vastly superior foreign products, we better ban that as well. And if people decide to leave the country en masse because they’re too morally weak and desire wealth, we can’t have that either, so better build a wall.

And the party is in charge of enforcing those laws right ?

That would tip the balance of power to another corrupting influence. Corporations, say. Or professional associations representing highly-educated high earners like doctors or lawyers. Or to politically savvy deca-millionaires who use their money with more focused attention. And that's setting aside the question of how and whether you could prevent the existence of billionaires, which would lead to offshoring and (plausibly at least) dramatic unintended changes in what kinds of social and technological change happens. But either way, coalitions corrupting institutions is not a soluble problem generally. It gets solved with acts of effort and courage like this one, and by discussions like this.

> That would tip the balance of power to another corrupting influence. Corporations, say. Or professional associations representing highly-educated high earners like doctors or lawyers.

Even if what you say is true, which I do not grant, your implication is akin to "we should not punish criminals, because some other criminals will rise to take their place." It's a defeatist meme that mainly serves to protect the interests of the already-powerful.

Some work is never done, but that is not a reason to give up on it.

Loopholes will be found, wealth will be concentrated in new ways, and then the wealth will be used to revert laws to benefit the wealthy. The laws won't change in the first place since money has captured most political systems as well.

Yes, give up and don't try, on the scale of things you will be dead and forgotten anyways - a failure in every sense of the word regardless of what you do.

Even people famous in their time are forgotten in short order. A good lesson for those deluding themselves into thinking they'll be an exception. Better to be remembered as a decent human being to your loved ones.

There are some billionaires who are literally asking to be taxed more. Not much success convincing US govt.

Because they are full of shit. Where is the "pro billionaire tax" think tank and super-PAC they are funding?