I feel like you'd end up with a lot of people making $99M. Though I can see that being a good thing with prices for whatever the person made money from falling or driving investment instead of hording so it might actually work out

[–] TheBeege@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Nah. If it's a graduated system like our taxes are now, there's no advantage to staying under the next bracket. Good trying to think of edge cases though

[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago

You'd have a ton of people near $10m for sure. It would also be less rewarding to get over $10m. You'd need to make over $10m a year to cap out, so the top 0.01%.

Also note you could still live like a king even in this system. If you made $1b a year, just spend or donate it each year. Go to space, buy a thousand homes for the homeless. But most rich people don't work to begin so probably not them.

[–] burntbacon@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Wealth, not income.

[–] ReasonablePea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

In that case the 100 millionaire becomes homeless?