I dont think taxing them will accomplish much. its also trivial for corporations to evade taxes, and all of the big ones do.

I think the ease of raising money is part of the problem. Loads of tech companies way over-raise, and develop into bloated cancerous messes that have no way of ever realizing the growth that would have to exist to warrant the investment theyve been given.

In the first place, the only way their investors even expect make anything back would be by reselling the stock, making it a ponzi asset.

The entire system is just propped up by peoples 401ks being funneled to institutional investors. Its inherently unstable.

Make social security good enough that middle class citizens dont need to invest, and the overinflated value of stocks plummets back to earth.

I think the people that built a company are better qualified to elect their ceo than the bulk populus. Gotta be democratically elected by workers imo, though a simple majority isnt always the best way.

Your questions at the end are what distinguish this from a co op.

Im not saying i have an answer for every case, but a co op has strictly one vote per employee.

I think itd be okay to build on top of that and let co-ops of more than 2 people set up some sort of charter or constitution that requires periodic re ratification.

3 is the minimum amt of employees that makes sense imo.

answered this one here : https://lemmy.world/comment/17993835

Well, if you want to tax billionares out of existance u need a wealth tax, aka unrealized gains.

taxing unrealized gains is just going to force individuals to sell their business to liquidate the cash to pay their taxes. Institutional traders will buy them up, so youre universally taking control out of the hands of people and giving it to banks and hedgefunds, which will just end up owning eachother.

I dont think any billionares exist that made their money in some other way than selling stocks in a business they acquired at a lower value, aside from inheritance or divorce.

Maybe you do implement a wealth tax anyway though, but you do it after abolishing stocks, just to catch the loopholes.

im definitely interested in not collapsing the world financial system, but its a tough problem to find a solution to.

there are other assets besides stocks banks could own - loans would definitely be a much bigger part of the pie.

As for starting a business, itd make sense to only hire on people you trust at first. Afterward you have to continue to show your worth not to investors but to employees.

As an alternative to trust, you could cut your own business a loan, so that if youre ousted as long as it doesnt go tits up you still get a payout.

Because it was spread by a totalitarian communist dictatorship. if the USSR were democratic , they wouldve spread democracy.

Maybe do shrooms somewhere its legal? Just once has been shown to do wonders for kicking addiction

Individuals are responsible for individual crimes, society is responsible for crime.

A modern electric compact truck like the 1992 gmc sonoma.

Firefox OS

A fairphone with the specs of the ROG phone, or just a repairable rog phone.

a 4k 240hz oled monitor

LFP phone batteries.

From the usa, safest bet would probably be a heist on an armored vehicle, killing the driver and taking his clothes and belongings and heading to mexico to change the money and get healthcare.

Or better yet , you might not even need to kill the driver. impersonate or bribe a cop and just pull them over and take the money. Cops did that all the time a few years ago, targeting companies related to weed since its federally illegal, making the transport of the profit on interstate highways vaguely illegal. They still can, but they supposedly dont.