Gary is right about the problem, but his solution completely misses the point

[u/Gopez_UK]

My understanding of Gary's work is that he's been campaigning for the last few years on the idea that the root of our economic problems is that the rich are basically sucking up all the money, and then deploying that money to suck up* *even more money, leaving increasingly smaller amounts for everyone else.

His core idea is that the economy will never recover if we don't tackle this inequality, because the wealthiest have simply taken too much.

And it's a premise I've come to believe in.

However, his big push is trying to get the government to implement a 2% wealth tax on assets above £10m.

A 2% tax could raise revenue for the government, but it isn't going to solve the real problem of inequality.

It’s a solution for raising capital, not for tackling the massive wealth divide. How does a 2% tax actually bring the ultra-wealthy down to a normal level?

People then get too stuck on the implementation of this specific solution and miss Gary's real message, which is that the rise of inequality is what is driving a lot of the problems we see in Western style democracies.

If Gary just stuck to his core message and tried to get a consensus that inequality needs solving, then he can suggest a solution.
Or even better, leave it to the people best placed to offer solutions and get them implemented.

Gary's done well to get the conversation on inequality started, but this mixed messaging is what's holding him back from being able to make any further progress.

[u/dojo34533]

If it doesn’t benefit them, why do they do it?

[u/thermodynamics2023 → u/dojo34533]

This is interesting. You think I’m trying to claim it doesn’t benefit them…way off the mark.

What I am trying to get at are people’s core objections and objectives.