Public opinion is shifting. The era of unchecked wealth may be nearing its end.
I. Introduction: The Tipping Point
We live in an age where a handful of men—some half-genius, half-sociopath hybrids—own more wealth than most countries. These titans, with names like Musk, Bezos, and Trump, don’t just influence markets; they meddle in elections, rewrite the future of labor, colonize space (badly), and tell entire nations what’s what, often with a tweet typed while sitting on a toilet made of gold.
And so we ask the forbidden question: if the people could vote today to limit the obscene power of billionaires—would they?
II. The Billionaire Question: What Are We Voting On?
Picture it: a global ballot that says, quite plainly, “Should we cap private wealth at a billion dollars? Should income over ten million a year be taxed at 90%? Should the hoarded wealth of the ultra-rich be funneled into public schools, clean energy, and keeping the planet vaguely habitable?”
Now, how you phrase it matters. Ask, “Should we punish ambition?” and expect a lot of sweaty libertarians quoting Ayn Rand and typing in all caps. But ask, “Should we prevent unelected individuals from hoarding enough power to distort democracy and reality itself?”—and suddenly the villagers are lighting torches and marching toward the castle.
It depends on how you ask it.
III. What Do the Numbers Say? (Country Breakdown)
Take the Netherlands. Egalitarian to the core, still slightly allergic to luxury, and armed with a long memory of what happens when elites get too comfortable. Rough estimates suggest that 50–60% of Dutch voters would support serious wealth caps, especially if the alternative is Elon Musk launching flamethrowers from orbit.
In the United States, things are murkier. Americans are still, by and large, raised on a diet of “you too can be rich if you just grind hard enough and believe.” But belief is cracking. Younger generations are looking at avocado toast and realizing they’re never owning a home, let alone becoming tech overlords. Even now, about 50–55% might back wealth caps. And in the aftermath of the next disaster—be it economic, ecological, or Elon-flavored—that number could rise like floodwaters.
IV. The Psychology of the Bootlicker
“But what if I get rich someday?” comes the whimper from the back of the room. It’s a common ailment: the Powerball Delusion. People defend billionaires as if they’re just one lucky scratch card away from joining the yacht club.
You’ve seen the memes: a cheerful cartoon guy enthusiastically devouring a boot, saying, “One day I will too be a billionaire!” It’s easier to fantasize about being the next Jeff Bezos than to admit he’d step over your corpse to avoid missing his dinner reservation.
V. What’s Already Happening
This isn’t just theory. Warren and Sanders have been pushing wealth tax proposals for years. European leftists are sharpening their knives. Even the IMF has dared to whisper that maybe, just maybe, inequality is bad for global stability.
Meanwhile, billionaires are already acting like they know what’s coming. They’re hoarding citizenships, building climate bunkers in New Zealand, and buying escape rockets. When the guillotines come, they intend to be in low orbit.
VI. What Would It Look Like If It Passed?
Imagine a world where no one is allowed to hoard more than $1 billion. Everything beyond that is taxed into oblivion. Annual income over $10 million? Claimed by the public and used to fix roads, fund hospitals, and perhaps stop the oceans from boiling.
The rich would still be rich—just not gods. They’d be rich like “nice house and two vacations a year” rich. Not “I bought a continent because I was bored” rich. And in their place, we’d have functioning systems, living wages, and public goods that actually work.
VII. The Inevitable Meltdown
Of course, the rich will not go gently. Elon Musk will rage-post about Stalin. Jeff Bezos will threaten to terraform the moon and move his operations there. Let them. The rest of us will stay here and fix things.
Let them flee to bunkers and space pods. Just tax the exits on the way out.
VIII. When Will Someone Put This on a Ballot?
Here’s the thing: this has never been on a ballot. Not really. The powers that be—banks, media conglomerates, lobbyists—are highly allergic to the idea of direct democracy that threatens their bottom line.
But it could happen. Local ballot initiatives. Citizen-led referenda in Europe. Populist parties that channel this rising anger. One serious proposal is all it takes.
The first country to do it will change the world. And everyone else will look around and go, “Wait… we can just do that?”
IX. How Much Is Too Much? Let’s Talk Numbers
Let’s get specific. A trillion dollars? No one has it—yet. But Elon’s working on it. That level should be outlawed preemptively.
$100 billion? That’s Musk, Bezos, Arnault territory. No sane society allows this. Slap a 100% tax on everything above it.
$10 billion? That’s still emperor money. Also taxable to death.
$1 billion? That’s your basic billionaire. You know, the kind who buys art made of blood. Some argue this should be the hard wealth cap—no one allowed more.
$100 million? Still in superyacht territory. Taxed annually at 5–10% minimum.
$10 million? That’s where the global rich begin. They should still contribute more than the average café owner.
And what about income?
A billion dollars per year? That’s… a crime. Tax it to zero.
$100 million/year? Hedge fund vampires and CEO warlords. Take 90–95%.
$10 million/year? Still decadent. They can pay 70–90% without even noticing.
$1 million/year? The upper class. Doctors, entertainers, lawyers. Progressive tax, sure, but nothing too insane.
And the $200K–1M club? They’re upper-middle class in rich countries. They’re fine. Let them keep the Tesla.
X. Corporate Wealth vs. Private Wealth
Let’s squash this slippery dodge: corporate wealth is not magically separate from private wealth. If you own the shares, control the votes, sit on the board, and get the dividends—you own it.
If you own 10% of a $100 billion company, you are, in no uncertain terms, sitting on $10 billion in private wealth. It’s not your summer home, but it is your power.
Control is wealth. Influence is wealth. The rest is accounting fiction.
XI. It Depends On How You Ask It
This is the final trick. If you say, “Should we punish ambition?” the average person gets nervous.
If you say, “Should we stop billionaires from buying politicians, platforms, and planets?” they vote yes.
If you say, “Should the ultra-rich help pay for the systems they rely on?” people start nodding. Fast.
This isn’t about envy. It’s about sanity. It’s about survival. It’s about power being accountable to the rest of us.
Ask the right question—and the answer won’t just be yes.
It’ll be a roar.
XII. Historical Footnote: A Debt of Our Own Making
As of April 1, 2025, the United States has a collective state debt of thirty-seven trillion dollars. That’s $37,000,000,000,000—an amount so colossal it may as well be written in dragon gold.
Now imagine a parallel timeline where the U.S. had simply kept the tax codes of the 1950s uninterrupted. Back when the top marginal tax rate was over 90%, when corporations paid their fair share, and capital wasn’t treated like some fragile deity that had to be endlessly pampered.
What would the national debt look like today if we had stayed that course? Odds are, not like this. Instead of trillions in IOUs, we might have had surplus hospitals, green infrastructure, and functioning public transit.
But alas, Reagan happened. And then the Bushes. And then the cult of the free market. And here we are, with billionaires playing space cowboy while bridges collapse.
It’s time to rewrite the rules—and maybe this time, keep them.
