Zohran Mamdani’s Dream: Could the U.S. Turn into Cuba Without Billionaires?

In a recent statement that stirred intense debate, Zohran Mamdani, a progressive New York Assemblyman of Ugandan-Indian descent, declared his ideal society would have no billionaires at all. His vision? An America where extreme wealth is dismantled to prioritize equality and social justice.

But this provocative idea leads to a bigger question: If the U.S. had no billionaires, would it weaken economically and politically — perhaps even resemble a country like Cuba?

Let’s break it down.

Who is Zohran Mamdani?

• Member of the New York State Assembly (District 36)

• A Democratic Socialist, aligned with the DSA (Democratic Socialists of America)

• Vocal on issues like affordable housing, tenant rights, Palestinian solidarity, and economic redistribution

Mamdani’s ideology stands in stark contrast to capitalist ideals. His call for an America without billionaires is rooted in the belief that extreme wealth accumulation comes at the cost of systemic inequality.

Why Does He Oppose Billionaires?

According to Mamdani and others who share his views, billionaires:

• Exploit loopholes in tax systems

• Accumulate wealth faster than national GDP growth

• Influence public policy and elections through donations

• Widen the gap between rich and poor

• Reflect an economy that rewards capital more than labor

His ideology is similar to that of figures like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who argue for higher taxes on the ultra-wealthy, universal healthcare, and public ownership of essential services.

The Cuba Comparison: Symbolic or Sensible?

Critics were quick to compare Mamdani’s idea to Cuba, a country that:

• Eliminated capitalist wealth after the 1959 revolution

• Enforced state ownership and economic equality

• Suffered economic stagnation due to sanctions and central planning

• Still lacks technological innovation, foreign investment, and entrepreneurial opportunity

Would removing billionaires really make America “like Cuba”? Let’s look at the key differences:

So, eliminating billionaires wouldn’t automatically turn the U.S. into Cuba, but it could impact innovation, job creation, and capital flows—especially in the tech and startup sectors.

Can a Country Thrive Without Billionaires?

Some Nordic countries (like Sweden, Norway, and Denmark) often tax the wealthy heavily, yet they don’t eliminate them. They:

• Maintain a strong welfare state

• Still allow private wealth creation

• Invest in public healthcare, education, and innovation

• Promote balanced capitalism

These countries prove that you can regulate wealth without eradicating it.

Zohran Mamdani’s Vision: Utopia or Overcorrection?

Supporters argue:

• No one “needs” a billion dollars

• Wealth should be reinvested into education, healthcare, and housing

• Mega-donors distort democracy

Critics argue:

• Billionaires often fund innovation, startups, and philanthropy

• Over-taxation may push capital and jobs abroad

• It may create bureaucratic inefficiency if wealth shifts entirely to the public sector

Public Opinion: Divided Nation

Americans are split. A 2023 Pew survey found:

• 58% believe billionaires have too much influence

• But only 34% favor strong taxation or wealth caps

Clearly, people want accountability, not necessarily abolishment.

Conclusion: Should the U.S. Be Billionaire-Free?

Zohran Mamdani’s dream of a billionaire-free America is bold, idealistic, and grounded in justice. But the reality is more nuanced.

While unchecked wealth concentration poses a serious threat to democracy, a Cuba-style economic model may not be the right solution. Instead, perhaps the focus should be on:

• Fair taxation

• Transparent political funding

• Ethical corporate behavior

• Robust public infrastructure

A balanced approach may deliver equity without sacrificing innovation.