Extreme wealth is a big problem: “We see successes as our own advantages”

Extreme wealth is a big problem: “We see successes as our own advantages”

“There are actually a lot of arguments for that,” Robbins begins. NOS with an eye on tomorrowWhen asked why it would be good if the rich weren’t so rich. “I can’t name one major argument because it has multiple harmful consequences.”

An example is climate change, Robbins says. “There’s just been another report coming out that suggests that if people are very rich, they pollute more through their consumption and investments. But what we’re also seeing in a number of countries is that it undermines political equality. These are both arguments that can be made about dealing with the consequences of being very rich. “

A danger to democracy

According to Robbins, it also poses a danger to democracy. “I think it’s very clear in America that we can no longer talk about democracy. And that’s also what political scientists say, who say this is just a plutocracy. So, where money determines who gets power.”

When it comes to extreme wealth, Robbins looks to the richest 1% of the world’s population. When someone falls under this depends a lot from country to country. “In America, for example, the rich and the super-rich have much greater wealth than we do. If you say 1 percent, you’re just looking at the distribution.”

Then the richest 1% of the world’s population will be extremely rich. “But I think this is actually an incorrect definition. I propose that the limit of political wealth should be 10 million euros. You should strive for a society in which no one has more than 10 million euros. Then economic incentives give enough room to enhance the motivation of people to work hard.” Larger.”

See also  What words by Nikola Jokic

Change the economy

Robins believes that if someone has more than 10 million euros, it should be reduced by changing the economy. “You can eliminate taxes, but you can also organize the economy differently. This can be done, for example, by distributing corporate capital more among the population.”

Robbins hopes to gain support for her border idea. “That’s why I advocate for this as an ideal regulatory model, as a point on the horizon. I think if we’re all moving in that direction, but particularly talking about the reasons why concentration of wealth is a problem, then I think that’s actually a very good thing.”

“Right now, there’s not a good picture,” Robbins says. “In recent decades, we see successes as our own achievements. The counter-image to that is that very bad people are seen as having caused it themselves. But if you have a view of humanity in which you attribute a lot to chance, then, you start to look at yourself in a different way.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *