Why can't American Dummycrats understand that taxing billionaires won't make everyone else wealthy?

[SeekerOfTruth007]

Money isn't magic. Without billionaires who invented all the technology we use, none of us would have our present quality of life. We'd all be living with horse and buggy again.

If you stole Donald Trump's entire net worth and redistributed it to everyone else, that would only be $10 per person or so in the USA. About half of everyone is addicted to cigarettes, alcohol, and illegal drugs, so we know 50% of people would blow their 10 dollars on their addictions.

If you stole Jeff Bezos and Meta's entire net worth and redistributed it, that would be about $3000 per person, and again half of all people would just blow it on addictions and whores. This would be a one-time payout, and then Amazon and Meta would be bankrupt and we'd have NOTHING again.

Updates

8 mo

Do you realize a Cigarette Smoker blows more money in their lifetime on their LEGAL addiction which is killing them, than what they'pd recive if we stole all the net worth of every billionaire nation wide and distributed it? You cigarette smokers blow between 1800 and 3650 dollars per year, not counting tax, if you are a ONE pack per day smoker. In your lifetime that adds up to the value of your HOUSE.

[Syntosi]

Why won't Dummypublicans understand that taxing billionaires is not about making everyone else wealthy? Its about making them contribute their fair share to the community that has allowed them to become billionaires.

Also, this whole fanfiction about how billionaires are holding up modern society or the driving the economy, yeah no. Not buying it. Every piece of evidence points to them just being worthless parasites that kills innovation and competition to maintain a status-quo where they accumulate wealth with minimal effort.

I mean, we meme all day and night about how agents in suits appear outside the door of mad scientists who supposedly invents perpetual motion machines or whatever and the next day the innovation or person is gone but in reality that is sort of how these people operate, if less cartoonishly.

If you have a promising technology that threatens them then they will either sabotage you or buy up your patents and just sit on them. They have no interest in actually developing anything new if they dont have to. They dont have any incentives to push technology or innovation further outside of very small circumstances such as AI. Just look at all the money and resources that has been pumped into AI recently and ask where that was before. They could have rolled a dice and catapulted any industry into the year 2500 if they wanted.. but they didn't. Instead they just sat on it in the hopes of adding another zero to their bank accounts like some fat and lazy version of mythical dragons.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

You have no idea how much computing power is required to make even the pathetic crap they call "AI" now to work. I helped design an AI concept way back in 2008 on PhysicsForumsdotcom, and we all agreed the machine concept I designed would be dangerous to humans and unethical to build. Not because I did anything evil, but because a machine that intelligent might reason that humans are inferior to itself and exterminate us after all.

Technology isn't just magically invented. It takes hundreds and THOUSANDS of man-hours to invent the Telephone from scratch, and that's a relatively simple device by modern standards.

Also, the Circuitry in computers is nearing the atomic scale already. There are NEVER going to be "Star Trek" "Giga Quad" computers, because that is not physically possible to build by the laws of this Universe. Moore's Law has just about run it's physical universal limit and 3-d architecture is not magic.

Welcome to the 25th century, baby, because we aren't going beyond the 21st century, and we're never flying to another Star either. That's a pipe dream fantasy invented by Science Fantasy authors. It's no different than the Lord of the Rings. It never happened and never will happen and never could have happened.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

Computers are never going to be much more powerful than they are right now, because they are already at the Quantum Tunneling Limit whereby electrons and photons tunnel through circuitry instead of traveling in the circuitry, which causes the computers to malfunction.

There is never going to be a "general purpose quantum computer" at least not an affordable one smaller than a football stadium, because of the nature of the way the machines work. Quantum Computers can only solve problems when the solution is already known, so they are only used to check your work, not solve new problems.

[Syntosi]

What on earth are you talking about? First of all, you did not design shit back in 2008 and I dont need a midwits pathetic understanding of science to tell me that "we have reached the limit". You do realize that people have always been saying this throughout history and every time they have done so their "prediction" if you want to call it that has always aged like fine milk.

Just for fun, here is one of my favorites:

And then 9 weeks later we have powered flight.

And no shit, technology is not just magically invented. Putting aside the arbitrary nonsensical time estimate you provided, what do you think the rich has the ability to do? If you want man hours dedicated to a project, who do you think has the resources to accomplish such a feat? In whose court is the ball currently and we are waiting for to make a play? The billionaires literally has "all the power in the world" to change it however they want and.. they just aren't doing jack shit outside of pushing the agenda of "enshittification".

All the human potential in the world with literally the entire Earths pool of resources and we are trying to maximize how to make the user experience of service products as horrible as possible for profit. What a fucking waste. Thank you Capitalism for choosing warhammer 40k over Startrek as our future. Like seriously, the Departmento Munitorum and Adeptus Mechanicus is more efficient and productive than this which is just fucking sad.

And for the record, the currently problem with computing has nothing to do with reaching the physical limitation of going smaller. We are currently struggling primarily with heat management and signal speed so shut the fuck up with your lack of technical understanding.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

There is no way to build circuitry beyond the Atomic Scale, you lying half-wit.

You're either a 12 year old troll, or you're the dumbest adult I've ever encountered in my life.

And yes, I did design several AI components in 2008. I left the project because it was unethical.

[Syntosi]

First of all, why would it be impossible to build circuity beyond the atomic scale? Secondly, even if it was, have you considered... the "cube"? We are literally just making them in what is essentially 2D right now. We could exponentially increase computation by adding a 3rd dimension in our design.

And you are the quintessential midwit. Smart enough to form an opinion but too dumb to understand how dumb it is.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

I already told you in an earlier post 3d architecture is overrated. They are already making 3d transistors to try to get around the quantum tunneling problem. You are limited by how much heat waste you can dissipate, so you cannot just build a "cube of transistors/processors" and call that a computer, because it will BURN UP IN ABOUT 30 SECONDS FLAT.

[Syntosi]

Just job contradicting yourself and proving me correct. "You are limited by how much heat waste you can dissipate, so you cannot just build a "cube of transistors/processors" and call that a computer, because it will BURN UP IN ABOUT 30 SECONDS FLAT. "

So, what you are saying is that we are not limited by the quantum tunneling problem (AKA size) but rather heat and signal speed. Well fuck me if I am not correct again.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

You don't know anything about computers. I majored in engineering and computer science.

[Syntosi]

Wow, and you still dont have a fucking clue! What an accomplishment!

[SeekerOfTruth007]

Both are limits dummy, both are limits.

IBM was stuck at the 6NM limit due to quantum tunneling for over 20 years, and the other computer companies caught up with them.

Now everyone is stuck on a 1nm 3-d process and has no idea how to proceed.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

And 1nm is about 3 silicon atoms wide, so they are almost to the scale of individual atoms, and there is no way to use a proton or a neutron as a transistor, much less the bullshit of Star Trek using Quarks in Calculation.

[Syntosi]

Again, you are a midwit. Saying we are going to be stuck on something which we have always found a new way to get around is certainly brave, but what truly brings your ignorance home is that you think we are actually limited to the basic design of a transistor or even physical matter. There is nothing that says we can't make a computational unit using energy for example or make a more powerful computational unit than a transistor.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

The Uncertainty Principle makes it IMPOSSIBLE to even say where a sub-atomic particle happens to be, so there is NO WAY to use it in calculations. That has been SETTLED SCIENCE for over 100 years.

[Syntosi]

That is not what the uncertainty principle says and its not like what not literally just done this with quantum computing.

In fact, quantum computing is a perfect debunking of everything you believe in since it is fundamentally a more efficient method than traditional transistors since every qbit can function as 2^n equivalent transistors. Furthermore, they function by measuring particles which is apparently fucking impossible if your name is "SeekerOfTruth007" which fortunately is not true for most scientists I know so I think science is safe for now.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

Liar.

From Google AI:

"The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is a fundamental concept in quantum mechanics stating that certain pairs of properties of a particle, like its position and momentum, cannot both be known with arbitrary precision at the same time. The more precisely you measure one property, the less precisely you can know the other, with the trade-off defined by Planck's constant (\(h\)). For example, attempting to pinpoint a particle's exact location will make its momentum more uncertain, and vice versa. "

The reason you are never going to have a desktop PC that runs on quantum mechanics is because it takes a detector the size of a football field to make a quantum calculation. It's flat out NOT WORTH IT and professional physicists are starting to realize and admit that.

There is a LIMIT to EVERYTHING, especially human knowledge and technology, and we are going to hit the limit in about 10 more years.

[Syntosi]

*facepalm*
Can you read English? First of all I find it hilarious that you are using an AI for this but putting that aside. "stating that certain >>>PAIRS<<< of properties of a particle, like its position and momentum, cannot both be known with arbitrary precision at the same time."

In other words, its perfectly reasonable to measure the accurate position or state of a particle which means that there is nothing stopping you from using it as part of a computational unit. You dont need to have full awareness of the particle for it to be useful to you.

Also, now we have moved even further away from your original position and now we are arguing over the size of the detector we would need to measure particles as a limiting factor rather than the size of the transistor itself.

Like honestly, how bad are you at this?

[SeekerOfTruth007]

You moron. To use a particle in a calculation, you need to know both its position and its momentum or velocity. That's the whole damned point.

YOU DON'T KNOW A DAMNED THING ABOUT PHYSICS NOR COMPUTERS, SO STFU MAN. YOU'RE EMBARRASSING YOURSELF.

[Syntosi]

No you fucking dont. In fact, quantum computing is literally using the uncertainty of the particle as part of the computational process. Again. Fucking midwits.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

No it is not. You know nothing apparently. The uncertainty principlel is the biggest problem in quantum computing, because it causes decoherence which means the data is lost.

[Syntosi]

Uh-huh? Tell me you dont understand quantum computing without telling me. You do realize that the whole basis of quantum computing is how to abuse the uncertainty principle to do our laundry right?

[OneViewpoint]

When will American low IQ MAGA filth realize that the point of taxing billionaires is not to make other people rich directly. The point is to level the playing field and remove handful of people with hugely imbalanced wealth and therefore power from being able to corrupt our political system with dark money by simply buying politicians at auction in every election. That ensures maybe some laws are actually introduced and passed to serve most of "The People" and not a few billionaires and corporations alone while 340 million people struggle on the edge of poverty, ignorance, and health issues. That's what stops the wealth inequality genius.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

I have a 187 IQ.

Wealth is generated by hard work and discipline. Wealth is not generated by fake governments giving handouts to everyone. Haven't you noticed, Earned Income Credit did not solve the poverty problem, but it did impoverish the Federal Government which has accumulated 27 TRILLION additional dollars of debt since the Earned Income Credit was introduced and most of this extra debt is in fact paying for the Earned Income Credit.

There are not 27 trillion dollars worth of billionaires in the country. There is not even 27 trillion dollars worth of land value in the USA.

[OneViewpoint]

I think if you divide that IQ by 3 you may be closer to the truth. Who lied and told you you're intelligent? You'd think that even with an IQ of 63, you may have picked up on the lack of any mention of government handouts in my response. And your buddy tRump is responsible for about one third of the total federal debt with only 5 years in office over 1.25 terms so far. Did that reality escape you too?

You keep focusing on the assets of billionaires and instant redistribution of wealth like a junk yard dog latching onto a porkchop. As I already told you but you seem incapable of understanding, teh problem is getting rich people out of the habit of buying politicians and therefore government while making your vote meaningless. Maybe if your IQ were 225 you'd be able to understand that.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

Rich people buying votes is already illegal. There is a very small cap on campaign contributions already, which may be a few thousand dollars.

[OneViewpoint]

Wow, are you really this clueless or simply lying? Go research the Supreme Court Citizens United decision in 2010 that legalized political bribery in the United States.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

No. Bribery is when you take a gift to give someone an unfair advantage.

Political Contributions just pay for the cost of running a campaign, which is millions and millions of dollars in modern campaign design.

They still impeach Senators and Representatives for taking illegal bribes. In fact, a couple Louisiana Representatives have had to step down in lieu of Impeachment because they were caught taking cash gifts and not reporting them on their tax returns.

If Bribery was literally legal, Jeff Bezos or Mark Zuckerberg would be President of the USA already. Instead, they are just "cute" people that other people either worship or mock.

[OneViewpoint]

I thing that huge IQ of yours has gotten in the way of your vision.

Political campaign contributions are bribes when they are dropping millions of dollars anonymously. You’re just another MAGA shill for Reich Wing corruption in politics.

[Kelly6]

Question is why are you defending billionaires. And

you want to pay mare tax then billionaires?

[SeekerOfTruth007]

Nobody pays more taxes than billionaires. Donald Trump ends up paying several million dollars tax every year. I'm not sure what the exact figure is, but his son even said so on nation-wide television back when everyone was throwing a fit about him allegedly not paying taxes. Trump's net worth and income is a tiny fraction of Jeff Bezos'. Now Bezos is one who doesn't believe in paying taxes.

[loveslongnails]

LMAO Good Lord, you're missing SO much of the picture, I can't even unpack all of this, so one brief point. Taxing billionaires so they pay an equitable amount is not for the purpose of redistributing wealth, it's to add to the general fund. The problem will STILL be how that fund gets allocated to provide which services.

The US government throughout the ages has shown a true inability to prioritize promoting the general welfare with the intend to educate its citizens and keep them healthy. Rather, they have prioritized a war machine. A sudden influx of cash to the same general fund would not be used for anything BUT that war machine or private grifting of that money.

So your point is correct, sort of, in the worst possible way while evading the true reason why it should be done. The entire system would need to be redefined, and the powers that be are not here to be benevolent in any way.

[exitseven]

The democrat politicians are lookin for quick answers for there base who mostly are made up of welfare recipients government workers and illegal aliens. Soaking the rich seems like an easy solution , much easier than actually getting a job you have to show up at every day.

[NaultD]

you fell for the trap that billionaires do anything. By every measure they are more or less gambling addicts.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

Um, Steve Jobs built the first somewhat affordable home computer in his garage with help from Steve Wozniak and Ronald Wayne. They build the computers from scratch and programmed the operating system in machine code with the first generation of home software.

Technically, Bill Gates contributed nothing to computers except he stole Steve Jobs one button mouse idea and invented a two-button mouse instead.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

Based on your self-reported age, you come from a generation of young people who can't even count to one billion and can't even read a tape measure correctly, so I won't be taking your posts seriously anyway.

[FunkyMonkee]

They're dummycrats!! What'd you expect, rocket science?

[beefcakebradybatson]

Why can't REPIGLIKSWINE accept that the enormous socio-economic gap between the overlords and everyone else has rotted out the USA?

[blackeagle007]

Why can’t the rich pay taxes like everyone else?

[DrPepper12]

Your premise is flawed & biased

[msc545]

We don't really care. We want to tax them anyway.

[BarryLiverstone]

It fits their narrative