How about instead of begging to be taxed you invest that money into a project needed to help Canadians who aren’t well off.
Build housing with your money.
Build infrastructure with your money.
Help others fund Green alternatives with your money.
Donate to the thousands of charities who will do this all for you if you are lazy.
But stop bitching like you do not have the option to spend that money well on your own for the benefit of others. Especially when the rhetoric is “Government bad” at all times making it really hard to push for a tax increase on anyone.
The problem with this is creates a bunch of micro-musks, who can get high ideals for shifting society into their warped perceptions by sniffing their own virtuous farts.
The system we have certainly isn’t fair or efficient, but it’s better than feudalism dressed up as altruistic capitalism.
Also good for good’s sake by just throwing money at whatever millionaires think might be needed is simply making the overall societal problem worse, because of the warped perspectives they have.
Thoughtful coordination, planning and disbursement of funds to create good public works requires careful government.
I don’t disagree, and the topic is “Millionaires who want to be taxed more”. My point on that topic: Do something good while you wait and push for more taxation.
The Chan-Zuckerbergs stopped funding social causes. 400 kids lost their school.
Priscilla Chan’s decision to stop funding the school she opened to help struggling families shows the risks for communities reliant on wealthy private donors.
Using money for charity is great, but having the government tax and manage it all instead is much, much better. Because it won’t suddenly disappear. Unless your ruler’s name is Donal Trump.
The point is: Yes, more taxes, but if not then there is literally nothing stopping them from doing good with their money right now. This moment. Not next year when they file their taxes.
All throughout most modern history … if you set up an economic system where you allow humans to gain unbelievable amounts of wealth and ask them or wait for them to share it, they never do and instead use that wealth to gain even more sums of wealth in a never ending cycle. I know plenty of wealthy people and they do share their wealth, just not in the sums you want to imagine - they share a few hundreds or thousands here and there but never enough to create meaningful change and never in the amounts to affect the growth of their wealth.
This is about “millionaires begging to be taxed” instead of doing it themselves. I am not expecting them all to do it, just the ones who seem to not want to keep their money so others can benefit.
Uh… Given their values it is very likely they do donate to charities, but how far do you think a million can go in the modern day? You say “build housing,” but a million dollars are like, a house? Two houses? Until you reach the hundreds of millions level of obscene wealth, you need numbers before you can get anything done, so pushing for higher taxation is one of the most productive things this person can do with their time and money.
A lot of wealthy families believe philanthropy should fill these gaps, but that’s not going to cut it. Charity has its place. Private philanthropic initiatives can take risks and innovate in ways that the government’s financial controls and political concerns don’t allow. For example, I’m putting money into marine electrification—funding research, engineering and infrastructure to shift boats and ships away from fossil fuels. This is a new and niche part of the climate fight, where private efforts can actually move the needle.But, at the end of the day, only the Canadian government has the scale and breadth to lift all Canadians up to a better standard of living. Just as importantly, the Canadian government is accountable for its spending to all Canadians. A democratically elected government that demands the wealthy reinvest in this country—instead of waiting for them to pick and choose their own spending priorities—is the only solution to our biggest economic issues.
The person who wrote the article is using their wealth for good according to the article, but more importantly as he says only the government has the scale to use the 0.1%'s wealth for the benefit of all Canadians. This is about more than just wealth; we’re talking infrastructure, knowhow, flexibility, scalability, legitimacy and a whole host of other factors here. Philanthropy is a bandaid, but it’s not a sustainable solution because it’s ultimately predicated on the whims of an individual. And again, to repeat: “Never have to work again in my life” money and “literally change the world” money are completely different scale. The person who wrote the article seems to be the former, not the latter.
How about instead of begging to be taxed you invest that money into a project needed to help Canadians who aren’t well off.
Build housing with your money.
Build infrastructure with your money.
Help others fund Green alternatives with your money.
Donate to the thousands of charities who will do this all for you if you are lazy.
But stop bitching like you do not have the option to spend that money well on your own for the benefit of others. Especially when the rhetoric is “Government bad” at all times making it really hard to push for a tax increase on anyone.
The problem with this is creates a bunch of micro-musks, who can get high ideals for shifting society into their warped perceptions by sniffing their own virtuous farts.
The system we have certainly isn’t fair or efficient, but it’s better than feudalism dressed up as altruistic capitalism.
No it doesn’t. It creates caring people working to benefit their communities with the excess they have been blessed with. Do good for good sake.
The kind of person who is capable and willing to accumulate billions of dollars is generally not the kind of person who will do good for good’s sake.
Also good for good’s sake by just throwing money at whatever millionaires think might be needed is simply making the overall societal problem worse, because of the warped perspectives they have.
Thoughtful coordination, planning and disbursement of funds to create good public works requires careful government.
I don’t disagree, and the topic is “Millionaires who want to be taxed more”. My point on that topic: Do something good while you wait and push for more taxation.
http://archive.today/2025.06.30-022902/https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2025/06/29/mark-zuckerberg-priscilla-chan-school-closure/
Using money for charity is great, but having the government tax and manage it all instead is much, much better. Because it won’t suddenly disappear. Unless your ruler’s name is Donal Trump.
The point is: Yes, more taxes, but if not then there is literally nothing stopping them from doing good with their money right now. This moment. Not next year when they file their taxes.
All throughout most modern history … if you set up an economic system where you allow humans to gain unbelievable amounts of wealth and ask them or wait for them to share it, they never do and instead use that wealth to gain even more sums of wealth in a never ending cycle. I know plenty of wealthy people and they do share their wealth, just not in the sums you want to imagine - they share a few hundreds or thousands here and there but never enough to create meaningful change and never in the amounts to affect the growth of their wealth.
This is about “millionaires begging to be taxed” instead of doing it themselves. I am not expecting them all to do it, just the ones who seem to not want to keep their money so others can benefit.
Uh… Given their values it is very likely they do donate to charities, but how far do you think a million can go in the modern day? You say “build housing,” but a million dollars are like, a house? Two houses? Until you reach the hundreds of millions level of obscene wealth, you need numbers before you can get anything done, so pushing for higher taxation is one of the most productive things this person can do with their time and money.
https://macleans.ca/society/tiny-homes-fredericton/
One example.
The person who wrote the article is using their wealth for good according to the article, but more importantly as he says only the government has the scale to use the 0.1%'s wealth for the benefit of all Canadians. This is about more than just wealth; we’re talking infrastructure, knowhow, flexibility, scalability, legitimacy and a whole host of other factors here. Philanthropy is a bandaid, but it’s not a sustainable solution because it’s ultimately predicated on the whims of an individual. And again, to repeat: “Never have to work again in my life” money and “literally change the world” money are completely different scale. The person who wrote the article seems to be the former, not the latter.
I am not going to argue with you about rich people arguing whether or not they should pay more taxes.
Fuck them for sitting on their money while people starve.
You’re pushing a few false dichotomies there.
If you aren’t going to elaborate at least do us both the favour of not wasting our time.