“His point being: you need to meticulously comb through everything that someone owns to properly tax their riches. And AI surveillance, he says, makes this not only possible but practical.”
Let’s say this guy is worth $18.5 billion and the IRS only taxes him on 10 billion because that’s what they found. That’s still $10 billion worth of new taxable income or at least It’s at least 10 billion getting taxed at a higher percent.
He’s acting like this has never been done before or like more jobs can’t be created to do this.
And they get to surveill the surveillance. I That way it will be fair.
How is this different from communism again they said?
Sounds like good arguments for wealth tax.
I’m sorta jiving with this tax the rich pieces of shit sorta thing
We already HAVE mass surveillance!
Yes but proportionally, if you let it just run, it will generate less surveillance total than what we were already doing and going to do worse.
Karp can his neo-Nazi buddy, Musk, and fly towards Mars with enough fuel and provisions for a one-way trip. F-him.
Clearly the world might need to explore other options to deal with the billionaire problem.
Extreme haircuts?
Yo I have some very solid ideas for a business plan, like, if we can get a few woodworkers and metal smithing guys and some steel sharpening guys we could automate the FUCK out of this
I prefer that billionaires and the Epstein class get the death penalty
Imagine how many people, worldwide, would not hesitate a second given the opportunity.
If we could all just get all such people together somehow and join forces, baby, I think they’d have a fiesta going!
Now, I dont believe in the death penalty. But I make an exception for these monsters.
Look that’s not how morality works.
Ok?
OK?
We’ll do these ones, but NO MORE.
Billionaire demonstrates to the world how billionaires can be dangerous, and why he, personally, should not be trusted with a billion dollars.
“People shouldn’t be allowed to buy elections”
“Well maybe you shouldn’t have that chair! Did you ever think of that?”
well then that means you should support wealth tax?
I mean this guy is seriously the CEO of one of the largest tech companies on Earth. He sees that people hate surveillance and then thinks that by flaunting even more surveillance threats he can obscure the connection between surveillance and rich people, lol. He is like the Trump of the tech world, a text book sociopath.
I want to be very clear that I am NOT endorsing violence toward billionaires.
I am merely pointing out that I fully believe that it will happen, and that I have read a history book, and I know about 1789 France.
I am endorsing violence against billionaires. We should make billionaires non-existent even if that means wielding violence as they do against the working class.
Billionaires are a global problem. With the ability to be anywhere in the world they want to be at any time, fucking up economies, corrupting governments, and more.
We should deal with them when and where we can, especially since our governments have proven susceptible to their corruption.What about endorsing violence towards billionaires that are endorsing (and sometimes perpetuating) violence towards all of us?
Do you know about the Bourgeoisie and the Aristocracy? Did the people fight for democracy or did the Bourgeoisie use the people to replace the Aristocracy with themselves?
So how do the people use the aristocracy to replace the bourgeoisie with themselves? There’s got to be some way!
How about the people have to select the best among them and let the best figure lt out in a public discussion?
We already have mass surveillance. Fuck this guy.
Tracking our phones, tracking all our internet activity, tracking our cars, tracking us in stores, tracking what we buy, tracking what we watch on TV… We’re already there.
That site is just Flock.
The level of personal tracking is absurd.
There’s a reason the supermarket wants you to use their app for “digital coupons”. There’s a reason they want you to scan inside the store.
As an added bonus, big-box retail has a natural immunity to external RF, which forces you to use their wifi, which can track you down to your position in a specific aisle, how much time you spend there, your path around the store, etc.
And then when you’re done, they know exactly what you bought because it’s linked to your store card (which is naturally linked to the app, which is tracking you around the store).
They know what cuts of meat you like just as much as they know what kind of fungal infection you have.
They know (roughly) what you decided not to get just as well as they know what you did get
They know how much time you spent calculating the best deal on paper towels (the planograms have been updated to reflect this…items that people spend a lot of time contemplating are no longer facing each other in the aisle…they are always on the same side of the aisle…you won’t find PT opposite TP, you won’t find dog food opposite cat food, etc…they can track your position in the aisle but not which way you face).
And that data is more valuable than the profits on the goods in your cart.
Just as one example.
A company designed for surveillance and named for surveillance devices in LOTR will cause surveillance.
Wealth tax will just make them slightly less unimaginably rich.
Paul Krugman insists that we’ll need to separate these people from their unimaginable riches if we want society to survive.
Of course they don’t want to give up their colossal capital, and would rather spend the rest of their lives going mad in their apocalypse shelters. An apocalypse they could have prevented if they could help but act like a cancer.
More rich if they supply the system to do it.
Off with his head already.
how can humans be said to be advancing when we allow clear liabilities like this person to flourish?
It’s him, it’s a threat, he’ll do it to recoup the money he’s paying in taxes.
Scumbag needs a lesson
Cool. Then we need that pronto. Isn’t that your company’s mission anyway?
Sounds like he wants the wealth tax to be so high that there is no “wealth” left. 'Cause no wealth means no mass surveillance.
That’s what he is advocating for . . Right? /s
The wealth tax doesn’t need to be so high that there’s no wealth left.
Just about neck level or so.
I’m thinking in that persons case, it certainly does.
