physicist mark buchanan wants to limit large incomes.

I was browsing my local newspaper and came across an article that I hoped was a joke, but no it was not. A physicist had a thought of limiting personal incomes to 500k after taxes. Then mandating giving anything over to charity. He then justified this mandate by saying rich people would feel better and be happier. I think he is a fool.
The headline in the paper had the words (mandating philanthropy). That's forced charity....wth? That is not charity it's robbery.

I couldn't find the newspaper article online but I did find the article. The link is below.


www.delawareonline.com...

Ahhh, so that is what physicists do.

I thought it was something else.

a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71

While it is just one person's opinion, many will jump on this.

Didn't this type of government get attempted somewhere a while back? Taking from the wealthy by the government and doling it out to the people so they could all be equal?

I'm sure it was tried once before.

Just can't remember. . . . . . . . . . .

a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71

It seems physicists are going all 'deGrasse Tyson' lately and giving us advice on things on which they have no experience or training. I would ignore this guy and move on.

originally posted by: butcherguy
Ahhh, so that is what physicists do.

I thought it was something else.

Maybe he's not very good at it...lol

The guy is an idiot and most likely wealthy.

I own my business and I'll be damned if someone tries to put any kind of limit on what I make.

Man I'm sick of people with liberal ideas wanting to dictate any aspect of my life. STFU and mind your own damn business.

I don't like wealth distribution in this form.

The fact is sure there are some horrific billionaires who are evil and sociopathic.

But there are some true visionary who are using that money for advancing the human race. I look up to the Elon Musks and Richard Brandsons of this world.


Instead of penalising ALL rich people we should just be tightening fraud and corruption laws and holding the rich to the same legal standard as everyone else. I see no issue if a Banker commits fraud jailing them and confiscating there money to pay for the damage but not punishing all rich for the actions of a few.

a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71

Yea, well...I've rarely met a Physicist who was particularly well versed in economics. And of course...its Delaware. What's to talk about today in Delaware? It's not just a slow news day in Delaware...its a slow news Decade in Delaware.

But, who's to say? Some of the dopiest people I've ever met were the wealthiest. Maybe some of them will sign up for this.

Unless i hit the lottery, i'll never know what its like to have more than 50k in the bank. Never heard of an idea like this. Makes sense to me. The rich will have to sell a few of their homes, cars, maids/ butlers. I suppose in the end, it's just not fair. Would be cool to see what would happen in this situation, though.

a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71

This tool needs to stick with his day job. If you legitimately make more than 500K yearly, you'll get a pat on the back from me as you've earned it.

a reply to: KawRider9


I'm just like you, I own my own business. This guy can just pucker up and kiss both cheeks.

I can see where he is coming from although i think 500K is a little on the low side. It's when someone's personal wealth becomes obscene that i have a problem with it.
What kind of a species are we when we allow a small number of people to own most of the money. What kind of a species are we when we allow a small number of individuals to bathe in the best that life has to offer whilst the rest mostly live in squaller. When children are homeless and starving.
Nobody on this planet should have more money than they could ever reasonably expect to spend, just sitting in the bank making them ever more money for nothing through interest.
I think the guy simply wants a system where nobody is hungry or homeless or in debt having their lives ruined.
It can be done, but we have to cleanse the planet of the greediest most despicable heartless scum first !!

Not saying that I agree with him, but to those who wonder why a physicist is talking about economics, Buchanan wrote an interesting article on that very subject: Arrogant physicists — do they think economics is easy?

a reply to: sayzaar


All this would do is keep someone from becoming rich. The wealthy would stay wealthy.
Good luck getting Tom cruise to cap his pay at 500k. He makes 20 million a movie.
How about the guy that finds a cure for cancer, he can't make more than a half million...lol
This idea is just awful.

For those that are saying "i made my own money and deserve it" ! are just the type of people that most are fed up with.
Nobody said you don't deserve to earn a great living but you have been blessed by being fortunate enough to be mentally healthy and stable, likely physically fit and quite possibly intelligent to some degree. But what about the less fortunate ? Do they NOT deserve to live a good and happy life ? Just because they may not be as intelligent as you and not understand how to make lots of money, or have business accumen, or suffer physically and unable to work or for many other reasons. does not mean they are any less 'deserving'.
If someone is making much more than very comfortable life earnings then they have money they do not NEED. That i believe is the point the guy was trying to raise. And justifiably i say.

a reply to: sayzaar

is that not what welfare and food stamps are for?how about subsidized housing?free book rental programmes at school along with free lunch programs?how much more help do they need to take?

Start with a cap on corporate salaries, force the money into the company & employee salaries. Capital gains will be more difficult to force limit.

a reply to: crazyewok

but that carries with it inherent complications.

a wealthy person is able to exert much more influence than anyone else.

they do this through use of campeign funding on a local, state, and federal level.

They also hold sway due to basically owning businesses that employ politicians constituency.

thus ultimately wealth can have an impact on politics and policy making, as well as law-enforcement.

a reply to: sayzaar
I think that anyone saying that other people should give up their money that they earned to others should pony up their money first... ALL OF IT.

If giving some is good, why not all of it? Live off welfare afterwards. Sell all of your cool stuff that you like that cost you money and give that money to others too.

Well, we know how much he makes now, a little under five hundred grand a year.