[simorley]

> If the US confiscated all of the wealth of the billionaires in the US (which would absolutely wreck the economy as well as that wealth, since much of that their wealth is tied up in stocks)...it would fund less than a year of government spending and not even be able to pay for the $3.5T package that is currently being debated (maybe close...the most recent estimate wealth for US billionares is between $3T and $3.5T).

That is so deceptive. You are assuming that everyone else won't be paying their taxes. Everything would be paid for but we could use the "confiscated" wealth for additional stuff. Not that I am necessarily for or against wealth redistribution.

Nobody is saying the wealth should be used to fund the government. The american taxpayers do that. The additional money could be used for other stuff.

[pjscott]

Are taxpayers funding the government? Last year, federal tax revenues were $3 trillion less than federal spending.

[simorley]

> Are taxpayers funding the government?

Yes. It certainly isn't the billionaires as all their wealth wouldn't as the OP noted.

> Last year, federal tax revenues were $3 trillion less than federal spending.

A once in a few generations pandemic will do that. See how when things are put into context, it doesn't seem so bad?