Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TBF

(36,176 posts)
50. It is immoral to have folk starving in the streets
Fri Feb 20, 2026, 10:50 AM
3 hrs ago

while others inherit wealth beyond their wildest dreams.

Beyond that, the folks that currently have the billions (and even multi-millions), while so many others struggle daily, is that it is affecting our form of government.

Billionaires now own our press, so that nothing negative is ever said about our president (who has on occasion declared himself a king). The extreme gap in wealth leads to the extreme gap in power as most are just struggling to get by as the very wealthy dominate the political systems, the press, the universities, the churches, the corporations, etc.

Most people in this country at this point in time have little hope of bettering their conditions, as they are locked into poverty from birth. It is always more likely that the children of the extremely wealthy are going to have extreme advantage in their own lives because they have so many advantages - they are not hungry and their foods are nutritious, they are clothed and have (magnificent) dwellings to live in, they receive the best education, the opportunities for enrichment and growth; the list goes on and on.

The real question is why we are standing for this. There are so many more of us than there are of them.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

We Need to Talk About Rich People [View all] Haggard Celine 15 hrs ago OP
I've had the same thought. Nobody needs millions or billions of dollars in cash or properties to live a good life... wcmagumba 15 hrs ago #1
I agree. Haggard Celine 15 hrs ago #2
And get rid of stepped up basis TexasBushwhacker 14 hrs ago #6
They have it figured out, don't they? Haggard Celine 14 hrs ago #10
And all that hoarding of capital TexasBushwhacker 14 hrs ago #11
I think they're trying to fix the economy so that it runs on Haggard Celine 14 hrs ago #15
But that's not sustainable TexasBushwhacker 14 hrs ago #16
Texas, you have an answer for me regarding how much stepped up basis you're willing to exclude? PeaceWave 14 hrs ago #18
I think that's what we should shoot for. Haggard Celine 13 hrs ago #19
That's what I wonder about too. AZJonnie 10 hrs ago #35
I often wonder how many of the common people do not understand this- no wonder the rich don't want Stargazer99 8 hrs ago #37
ALL stepped up basis? Throwing the baby out with the bath water, isn't it? PeaceWave 14 hrs ago #12
Of course, and I have no problem with a spouse TexasBushwhacker 14 hrs ago #13
Okay, so you've already made an exception for a spouse. What about for children? And, how much? PeaceWave 14 hrs ago #14
Not only that, markodochartaigh 12 hrs ago #29
Definitely a rigged system TexasBushwhacker 4 hrs ago #44
Let them earn (or steal) as much money as they want but Marie Marie 14 hrs ago #3
I think that's fair. Haggard Celine 14 hrs ago #5
Makes me sick! CountAllVotes 14 hrs ago #4
They think it all should be theirs. Haggard Celine 14 hrs ago #8
Line em up VanceFan 14 hrs ago #7
A health care system would be a nice start. Haggard Celine 14 hrs ago #9
Immigrants Aren't Stealing Your Jobs Mr.Bee 14 hrs ago #17
He said he was going after criminals and Haggard Celine 13 hrs ago #22
ICE is hiring the criminals. Thus the need for masks. travelingthrulife 3 hrs ago #45
And it isn't capitalism Figarosmom 13 hrs ago #20
OP, I notice that you didn't define either "wealthy" or "rich." How do we know who to go after? PeaceWave 13 hrs ago #21
Just like everything else, the government would have to decide Haggard Celine 13 hrs ago #23
Eventually though, these kinds of suggestions must narrow down to a specific number... PeaceWave 13 hrs ago #24
Well, any number is going to be Haggard Celine 13 hrs ago #27
Without actual numbers regarding the taxation of wealth, the discussion collapses into vaguery... PeaceWave 13 hrs ago #28
I don't know all the laws about Haggard Celine 12 hrs ago #31
Found this book at the thriftstore Puppyjive 13 hrs ago #25
Reagan broke the guardrails that prevented this. I don't think live love laugh 13 hrs ago #26
On limiting how much people can accumulate canetoad 12 hrs ago #30
I just want to take a lot of the power Haggard Celine 12 hrs ago #32
Elon Musk canetoad 12 hrs ago #33
Well said! Haggard Celine 11 hrs ago #34
The most doable thing with the best bang for buck is to invalidate Citizens United and force public funding of elections AZJonnie 10 hrs ago #36
It all goes back to that. And that goes back to the complete corruption of the Supreme Court under Roberts. Scrivener7 6 hrs ago #39
I was just thinking this morning that we didn't use to be so dependent on giant privately owned corporations. Scrivener7 6 hrs ago #38
Well said. Haggard Celine 5 hrs ago #41
You want them taken down a notch? OldBaldy1701E 5 hrs ago #40
Yes! AND stop giving them your money! I don't get why people won't do this. Scrivener7 5 hrs ago #42
Programming, my friend... programming. OldBaldy1701E 5 hrs ago #43
Message auto-removed Name removed 3 hrs ago #46
bye bye KS Toronado 3 hrs ago #47
And? BannonsLiver 3 hrs ago #48
Well, perhaps we can narrow the scope to wealth inequality TBF 3 hrs ago #49
It is immoral to have folk starving in the streets TBF 3 hrs ago #50
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»We Need to Talk About Ric...»Reply #50