this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2024
498 points (99.8% liked)
World News
32499 readers
629 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
For what benefit?
Unfortunately, only for their own benefit.
Increasingly not even for their own benefit. They are like a parasite that is killing it's host and therefore it's means of subsistence
That’s what always gets me. You can’t spend a billion dollars on yourself - you could live in the highest possible luxury, waited on hand and foot by the best, and you’re barely going to eat up half of it in a lifetime - even if your money earned no interest
They’re not even happy. They’re hated by many, idolized by others, and the rest want to leech off them. They don’t even have good relationships among their peers, it’s like a never ending dick measuring contest
so the adjuster notices them
For what benefit?
So the adjuster notices them
None, that's the funny part. You could almost call it a flaw with humanity as a whole.
We can't focus on any sort of task-at-hand for any greater good. We simply are just that self centered and greedy, despite those of us that fight against that nature, it's still our nature.
Climate change? You can't make people wear masks in grocery stores or vaccinate, good luck with the climate.
Two options, if you're shilling for billionaires:
They're intrinsically 10,000x better than you and me and deserve to be 10,000x richer.
It's just theirs. It says so somewhere, no backsies.
Pure trickle-down had it's day too, but it's it's a joke again in modern times, for the most part. You may object that these are all weak arguments, but basically, you and what army?
Edit: "We need a remote chance of becoming a billionaire for anyone to go to work" is kind of a blend of trickle-down and argument number one, but I suppose I should mention it, just for the sake of completeness
I guess even as a billionaire, the difference between your first 50 billion and your second 50 billion is that with your second you can make frivolous purchases of social media companies without going back to being poor.
It's still bullshit in the big picture of history.
Yeah, it's a continuous scale, which is something people miss sometimes. When you talk to people with millions of dollars they have a tendency to say they're not that rich, and point to some guy they know with tens of millions. They're not wrong per se even if they're dangerously out of touch; that extra digit changes a lot.
The bullshit is just that that scale goes way, way too high, as well as way too low. Human ability is normally distributed, and human worth is often held to be inalienably equal. Wealth follows a completely different distribution, for reasons.
This is either a boring rhetorical question or a very confused one.
I mean, my wealth has more than doubled over the past decade. The stock market has been going absolutely bananas, and my retirement accounts have done well.
I guess when corporate media told us the economy was doing great, it was you they were talking to, and not the other ~80–90% of Americans.
OK for some I guess.