this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2026
988 points (99.7% liked)

Not The Onion

22998 readers
2136 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)
[–] 2ndDegreeOWO@lemmy.world 3 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

We can debate exactly where to draw the line, for sure. And, honestly, it should be calculated as a multiple of minimum wage or 'poverty level' or something, to avoid the number becoming obsolete due to inflation.*

But, really, anything between $10M and $200M would be a fairly reasonable place to draw the line. The important part is to tackle the ultra-rich, the ones for whom even hundreds of millions is chump change. (Personally, I'm letting it edge up a little higher to account for small(ish) business owners and people/farmers who might own a particularly valuable plot or two of land.)

*Edit: $50M is ~6,896,551x the federal minimum wage of $7.25. For simplicity's sake, let's round the limit up to 7,000,000x. Which would make the limit $50.75M in total assets. If the rich fuckers want to be able to own more than that, they'll need to raise the minimum wage, which would then raise the limit accordingly. Raising the minimum wage to $10/hr would increase their limit to $70M, for example.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

The minimum wage should be 25. And land and housing should be nationalized.

[–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

good job losing any chance of winning the election (you just lost the retiree voter block)

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 2 points 16 hours ago

No idea who downvoted you. People over 55 own 73% of the wealth. They're personally affected negatively when minimum wage goes up or property prices down.