I enjoyed the concept of this book quite a lot. I agree with the author that most people probably don't realize just how much money a billion dollars is, and that no one needs that much--there isn't anything you can possibly do with it all--and it's a problematically rigged system where a few people make as much in minutes as most do in a year or more.

There was a lot of good information about the current state of our economy and some optimistic and enjoyable possible futures where people's income is limited. However, I did think the book was a little repetitive and that it was a bit too clear that this is only a thought experiment and not anything that might ever have a chance of happening.

Limitarianism tackles the problem of a growing divide between the super-rich and everyone else. Discussing the intersections of extreme wealth, power and influence, Robeyns offers a plan for how the global North (in particular) might move forward.

This is a hard book to review dispassionately as I wholeheartedly agree with the author. Limitarianism offers an approach to bettering the lives of all people by balancing socialist and capitalist ideals. Robeyns argues thoughtfully and attempts to head off any arguments against her solutions before they come to pass. I found the suggestions reasonable, actionable by a brave enough government, acting in the stead of its constituents, and easy to understand. As I said though, I already exist on the left of the political spectrum, support social security measures, and strongly believe there is no way to become super-rich without exploiting people in some regard. As such, my feelings about this book are likely influenced by my views. I don’t believe the book is likely to change any truly conservative minds, unfortunately. However, if you already believe some or all of what Robeyns is advocating, you are likely to find this book a thoughtful blueprint for how to behave more financially ethically yourself and advocate for change at a governmental level.

As I listened to the audiobook it is worth mentioning that I found this well read by Rachel Bavidge, who was able to communicate the sometimes dense information of this book very digestibly.

I found this book incredibly validating and informative. There was a healthy mix of the dire reality of our current economy and inspiration for the future. Some concepts I was previously aware of, but there were also so many new ideas and events that I learned about. I would recommend this book to anyone in our current collective crisis.

Overall enjoyed this book -- I thought it was well written on a topic of interest to me. The author did seem like she repeated herself here and there throughout, but I thought the arguments laid out were well done. I did question a bit who the intended audience of the book is, as quite a bit of the latter half of the book seems more geared towards the 1% themselves and how they can go about distributing their wealth despite the laws and tax codes not requiring them to. Somehow I don't think that that's who's going to be picking up this book, but I enjoyed it nonetheless.

At a minimum, this book is really thought provoking. I'm totally on board for limiting extreme wealth, so I didn't need to be sold on that concepts, but had hoped to hear more variety in terms of solutions. Unfortunately, it felt like this could have been edited down quite a bit to be less repetitive.

I was granted access to the audiobook version of Limitarianism, which I think improved the experience. I found the narration to be very well done!

While I'm sure this book will be incredibly unpopular for many, it's one I urge everyone to read and to really challenge themselves and their thinking. As someone who lives very comfortably (certainly not even close to ultra rich), but who also feels like I've worked hard for everything I have, I really had to push myself to think in a different way. And that is a very good thing!

Do I deserve everything I have? I guess I could argue that I do. But does that mean others who have much less or are in poverty deserve that? No! I had many advantages in life that got me to where I am and I also had some luck with my hard work. Though you certainly can go from living in poverty to being a millionaire (i.e. Oprah or JK Rowling as the book points out), it is SO much harder and much less likely. However, the world loves to point these people out and claim that "anyone can do it!" But this is just not true. You can even look at the natural abilities some are born with that others aren't.

When Robeyns mentions how much money we'd have to make per hour for our entire life to have as much as Elon Musk (close to $2M/hour), my mind was blown. Who needs that much money? And why are we allowing a man to have so much power over us simply because he has the money?

This is a very loaded topic and there will be lots of quick takes on it and defenses of why limitarianism is a bad idea, but the more I listened and the more I thought about it, the more I believe it's the only way forward. However, now that we're all used to living a certain way, it will be very, very hard to change things without people seeing it as their freedoms being taken away instead of maybe this is how we're supposed to be as a society. That's why it's important that more high-wealth individuals, like Abigail Disney, continue to speak out.

When there were times that I disagreed with Ingrid Robeyns was saying or I thought she was bring too "extreme" with the amounts of money she was talking about putting limits on, I simply increased the amount in my head to something that made more sense to me. After all, I live in an extremely expensive city in an extremely expensive country so my concept is likely different than others. And as Robeyns mentions many times, we shouldn't get stuck on the amount of money we'd put limits on, but should think more about the concept.

I would have loved to see more about how the ultra rich really are controlling our world, but I also understand how this topic is so large, it could be a whole other book. I'm pretty sure all the Supreme Court corruption news came out while she was writing this book and, of course, the book is globally focused and not just U.S.

Even if you think limitarianism is a terrible idea, I still think you should read or listen to this book as it will give you a lot to ponder!

Is there such a thing as too rich? Why should anyone be a Billionaire let alone thousands of them worldwide? And how have we gotten to this?

Ingrid Robeyns's research is incredible. I learned so much! Inequality should be a concern of everyone worldwide and pressure to regulate super extreme wealthy leading to benefits for everyone. Robeyns continuously reminds nay-sayers and yay-sayers alike to be open to conversations around Limitarianism. There is not much I can say to do this book justice, so you should just give it a read with your eyes or ears! WE all are at great dangerous if we don't.

Rachel Bavidge does a fabulous job at narrating the audiobook. Thank you NetGalley and Dreamscape Media for sharing this 5 star nonfiction read with me.

would be [book:Money, Possessions, and Eternity|67084] by Randy Alcorn. If that's too long, [book:The Treasure Principle|34600] is a very short alternative.

Note: It was frustrating that the author chose to use multiple forms of currency throughout (U.S. dollars, British pounds, Euros - whichever was applicable in her examples), without equivalencies in parentheses. I could only grasp the amounts being discussed about a third of the time because of this.

This was a super helpful point:

“If an economist talks about $1.90 expressed in <i>purchasing power parity</i>, they're not referring to what a person could buy with $1.90 in New Delhi….but rather, what baskets of goods a person could buy with around two dollars in the U.S. in 2011.” ≈15% into audiobook

This was an interesting and accessible read about the economic theory differences of focusing on poverty vs. focusing on inequality and the political climates that breed policy choices for tax breaks for the middle class upward rather than the middle class down and corporate bailouts on top of that tax relief. "Socialism for the rich. Capitalism for the poor."

The author asserts that poverty is generally easier to talk about, as it doesn't touch the sticky subject of why some people have more, but why some people have less. And it ignores the fact that wealth does not trickle down, it trickles up.

Before you think, "I don't want to pay more taxes," this book isn't about you. Make $1 million a year? It still isn't about you. Make $10 million a year? It is mostly not about you. This book is about those making $45,000+ an hour. Unless you are an oligarch, it isn't targeting you or your tax bracket.

She avoids naming an actual dollar amount of what might be a threshold between very wealthy and extremely wealthy, especially as different cultures provide different basic needs. It is pointed out that your money doesn't go as far in the U.S. when you have to pay for inflated education and health care costs. She comes close when she argues that while this line is too high, no one needs more than a billion dollars to be happy.

There is the claim that even those who use their extreme wealth (we are talking multiple billions here) for good, there is always harm. The book explores dirty money, worker exploitation, and disregard for safety regulations. Under the topic of dirty money, there is a chapter dedicated to industrial wealth forged by the Nazi regime and the Atlantic slave trade and institutions leading the way in restorative justice.

Most interesting were the chapters on shell companies, the wealth defense industry, subsiderideries, and corporate tax dodging--both tax avoidance and tax evasion. There are $470 billion of unpaid taxes in the U.S. yearly. The tax evasion value is ten percent of the global GDP. These tax deficits are then made up by the lesser 99.9 percent of earners.

Inequality hurts the economy as a whole. The inequality isn't just in the numbers, it is in the treatment too when it comes to court sentences. Rich crimes are not punished at the same rate as poor crimes. Theft holds an almost guaranteed jail sentence, but not pension fraud. It is also easier and cheaper for the IRS to pursue someone owing $5,000 in taxes than someone who owes $50 million. That's just for tax evasion. For tax avoidance, there's profit shifting. For example, in one year Amazon made $22.7 billion in Europe, but those subsiderideries file in Bermuda, where there are no corporate taxes.

The chapter on climate breakdown and its relationship with extreme wealth is the most depressing. Looking at global emissions, 48 percent are caused by the world's top 10 percent (29 tons per person). But for the top 1 percent , it is 101 tons per year. Carbon inequality is a huge deal for our global future. (Here's looking at you, space tourism.) In the author's bid for carbon taxing and dividends (for which my spouse has also lobbied in his spare time for the last decade), she asserts that there is no personal choice that can made that will balance with federal and international policies. The middle class can install all the heat pumps it wants, but it won't compare to the damage of private jets for single passengers.

Her actual suggestions for wealth limitations are varied--many interesting, some achievable, some extremely unlikely, and some just extreme. Her suggestions for estate and inheritance limits (not tax rates but a literal cap on value) I balked at, because they were lower than the current median home value in most likely any location in the U.S. People should definitely be able to inherit their parents' homes. I worry that when suggestions are so draconian, readers will just dismiss everything else she suggests and says in the book.

Thank you, NetGalley, for a an advanced copy of this manuscript.

This was a thought provoking audiobook about the huge wealth gap and ways to address it. I found it very interesting and informative though I have little hope that the political will in the U.S. will ever lean into taking steps towards improving incomes for those in poverty, actually taxing those who make more money than any human needs (while benefiting from the infrastructure provided by the government.) Sigh.

Thanks to the publisher and NetGalley for the ARC.

What a refreshing, approachable deep dive into the ways that current tax structures across the globe hurt us all. Unapologetically grounded in the basic principle that humanity is worth saving, Robeyns guides us through her philosophy and leaves us with a number of calls to action. I’m thankful for this book, for the hope it’s seeped in. I’m thankful for its backing in facts, statistics, and measurable outcomes.