Also, if $10 million is too low and $1 billion is too high, what number would be most effective in addressing economic justice, reducing the size of government, improving the efficiency of capital markets and (???).
Also, if $10 million is too low and $1 billion is too high, what number would be most effective in addressing economic justice, reducing the size of government, improving the efficiency of capital markets and (???).
In the land of the blind, the one-arm man is king.
Why it might be a bad idea:
1. A cap might cause deflation characteristics that would be difficult to control (at least for a time as monetary policy adjusted to the Cap).
2. Although I don't think that there would be a serious problem with people rejecting their US citizenship and moving to Brazil as some might argue, I might be wrong.
3. Although I argued that there is evidence that the super rich are not especially philanthropic, there is no evidence I know of that suggests that the somewhat-less-than-super-rich would be any more philanthropic.
4. Although I argue that properly a executed Cap with associated legislation would provide benefits, there are always ways in which the powerful find ways to use the 'system' to their benefit. For instance, some Catholic priest vow poverty, but their lifestyle is highly privileged, nevertheless.
5. The Cap might be so successful that we have a new imbalance in immigration.
6. The Cap might be so successful that other countries see civil unrest trying to achieve their own economic justice.
I'll hold off on suggesting a value for the Cap for a bit, yet. I'd like to hear what others think on both sides of the issue.
(I didn't mean ALL Catholic priests.)