Look, I know what you're going to say:
"Yeah, but it's not like billionaires keep their wealth around as bundles of physical currency on pallets in their inner pockets, so that'd never work quite like that."
Which is true, but even then it has more credibility as a socioeconomic policy than trickle down economics, so what does that say about the validity of trickle down economics? And hey, even if it doesn't make the captured purchasing power 'trickle down', I can still think of one or two guaranteed bonuses to this approach.
We probably should have a little nice civil conversation with the bank owners and hedge fund managers next anyway.
It might be tricky to get the mone...candy, but it sure will be a hoot.
Let's beat millions of 'poor' / 'semi-poor' / 'going to be poor' people and drive them to near death = good economics
Let's beat a few billionaires and millionaires = unacceptable chaos that would destabilize the world
Millionsbillions
Hey, that's waasay less efficient than guillotines with signs atop, declaring "Heroes Work Here", but I'm not against it — as long as it all goes into the fertilizer. Why not solve world hunger while we're at it, right? 🤘🏼🤗
i make it lain, you make the booty crap
