this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2023
262 points (96.5% liked)

Europe

8324 readers
1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡Ί

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out [email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

In reality, however, inequalities have persistently grown, to the point where today the richest 1% of the world's population own almost half of the global wealth and that same 1% also emit more CO2 than the poorest half of the planet.

Dumb argument for a tax in the EU.
If you earn 45000€ or more per year (post-tax) you are in the 1%. (According to this)
That sure is a nice wage, but it's definitely not rich and employees with a degree are not the people we should be taxing even more.

Also this:

The richest 1% of the planet own nearly half of all wealth. These same ultra-rich emit more CO2 than the poorest half of the planet.

So 45000€ is ultra-rich?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If you earn 45000€ or more per year (post-tax) you are in the 1%. (According to this)

€45,000/yr is in top 1% globally, but not the top 1% for the EU. Either way, the article is discussing a tax on wealth, not income. Even if €45,000/yr was in the top 1% income for the EU, someone making that salary is extremely unlikely to have accumulated enough assets to place them in the top 1% for wealth.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Yes 45K is the global Top 1%. But in the quoted parts they are talking about the global 1% and frame them as "ultra-rich". Not just the EUs Top 1%.

The richest 1% of the planet own nearly half of all wealth. These same ultra-rich emit more CO2 than the poorest half of the planet.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

the 1% the petition is talking about is global, as well as the ownership claims, and the CO2 pollution claim.

it's worded a bit oddly, but they want to tax the "global 1%", not (just) the "EU 1%".

as you pointed out, there's a pretty big difference between the two.

since the initiatives goals are largely about climate change, which is obviously a global problem in need of global solutions, this framing makes sense. it could have been written a bit clearer...

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

No. If you own 40.000€ per year, you are in the top 1% globally. So, β€žtaxing the rich 1%β€œ means not only taxing billionaires, but also average incomes in western countries.

Edit: Here you can check how rich you actually are: How rich am I?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nice Website but its only checks your income. If you have to work for your money your not rich in a western country

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

What? Of course you are. You are not rich by western standards, but globally you are.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I couldn't find anywhere what they mean by 1%. If it's as you say, and an annual income of €4500 is enough to be considered as such, then I think it would be quite excessive.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

I am a student and I have nothing, and I am richer than 28% of my country because I don't have debt.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

the richest 1% of the world’s population

If you earn 45000€ a year, which in many countries is just a bit above average, then you are richer than 99% of people in the entire world.