This post did not contain any content.

[evoscale@c.im]

@rbreich Law of Inverse Proportion, proving a larger, more valuable and sustainable middle human Range: keep insanity under 2%, and on the other end of the equation, keep the wealthiest, most powerful under 2% - especially when they overlap, over 98%.

This leaves a sustainable middle - currently fitting nicely between Communism, and Capitalism.

Now stop staring at Putin's Rump.

[oregon_slim@c.im]

@rbreich

So, maybe the top 50 wealth hoarders match the bottom 50% of families wealthwise?

[skyblitz@ieji.de]

@rbreich the bot is here still with no ALT.

[tknarr@mstdn.social]

@rbreich We need to be planning what to do about our Robespierre if one arises, because I think we're going to see the aristos meet their ends the way things are going.

[monolecte@framapiaf.org]

@TheForeignAgent @rbreich Ben non, et c’est bien mon propos.

[theforeignagent@social.taker.fr]

@Monolecte @rbreich je ne faisais que confirmer

[harryomvlee@mastodon.nl]

@rbreich

The net worth of the five biggest grabbers in 2026 totaled $1,696 billion.
That represents a 570% increase compared to the net worth of the five biggest grabbers ($297 billion) ten years earlier.

[morfil@climatejustice.social]

@rbreich this level of wealth concentration is expensive. It is far more expensive than you can afford

[luc0x61@mastodon.gamedev.place]

@rbreich Taxing the rich is a good plan, but again: who should make it a real plan, the politicians that to get elected are funded by those rich?
Maybe it's just me, but I see some little difficulties between the good plan and its actuation.
Do you really believe that intellectual honesty and good intentions will change it?

Let me foresee the future, with my crystal ball.
At some point, a 1% will own the 95%, only then a (non democratic, abrupt) change will happen. But if they're good enough...

[mastodonmigration@mastodon.online]

@rbreich

These are not just numbers. This is world wide hunger. This is quality of life. Everyone everywhere has less than half as much as they would have without these financial criminals.

[lmurch@mas.to]

@rbreich Good, god, it's not even "top 400 in the world", but "top 400 in the US". Disgusting

[stephendedalus@todon.nl]

@rbreich
They can keep their money.

[stephendedalus@todon.nl]

@skyblitz @rbreich
He's a clown

[skyblitz@ieji.de]

@StephenDedalus @rbreich half of people who comment don't see he will not answer ever it's a bot.

i report him every post for undisclosed bot but moderation don't seem to care to block undisclosed bot.

[crystalmoon@chaos.social]

@rbreich what happens when they all move to Bermuda?

[stephendedalus@todon.nl]

@skyblitz @rbreich
I remember him from Bluesky, and twitter.
You're probably right.

[saupreiss@pfalz.social]

@rbreich

And now Imagine how the lower 50% of Americans are on a global scale.

[ggmcbg@mstdn.plus]

@rbreich

You can't even buy a decent eating utensil set for $4.27.

Oh, well. Machetes and pitchforks it is instead.

[darkphoenix@universeodon.com]

@rbreich and with all the kickbacks and cheating and lying, it's not like ANY of them ACTUALLY EARNED their billions, they stole that money from us, and our children.

[facebita@mastodon.glombit.de]

@rbreich No. The Problem is not the concentration of wealth. The problem is only that wealth enables political influence and power. If politicians and – at first – efficient legalization would resist and limit the power of the money wealth would be nice but not dangerous.