How does this follow? Liquidating assets means selling them to a buyer... who can continue to operate the business.
I considered this route, but if the goal is to reduce wealth inequality, then leaving Amazon intact doesn't make sense. You leave it intact while selling to another wealthy buyer, you just traded Bezos for Bezos 2.
If you leave Amazon intact but nationalize it, giving every American own an equal share of the business, this doesn't give the average American any more control than the stock market does, except the new nationalized entity has government cover for fraud and mismanagement.
> If you leave Amazon intact but nationalize it
Sure. So leave it intact and sell it to a cooperative owned by the employees. Now you traded Bezos for a healthy incentive-aligned going concern with 1.6 million folks sharing the wealth. And Bezos still has his (one) vote!
Let's assume this is true. It must be compared to how many people's ambitions will have been awoken.
hell, even your dumbass suggestion isn't even considering second order effects. hundreds of millions suddenly being able to purchase products has a massive positive effect on the economy, more than anything Bezos could provide. It's VAT going in, it's smaller businesses seeing activity and providing more economcal activity in return, VAT that allows you to improve public services, rebuild roads, fix infrastructure, provide daycares and hospitals and social security so people can work.
But you're right, it's not enough: we must also seize land & properties from those owning 10+ to redistribute it, as well as build insane amounts of publicly managed housing to crash rental & purchase prices so people can live.