• TammyTobacco@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      I think it should be legal to murder a billionaire. They either have to pay for private security they can’t fully trust and always worry about being killed, or they can give away their money until they’re under a billion.

  • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    4 days ago

    Wow! So things must have gotten a lot better for people over the last 7 years!

    Right?

  • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    143
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Billionaires are a political choice as much as homelessness. They are allowed to exist because nobody does anything about it.

  • BilboBargains@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    If only we could combine Jim, Alice and Rob into a single entity called The Waltronzoid, we could easily defeat all the other billionaires by creating a bazillionaire.

    • bitwaba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      I think what’s fantastic about it is of they acted just as crazy as the other billionaires like Musk and Bezos where they decided they wanted to go to space. Then we could make fun of people blowing up their Walmart brand space ship and be like “what did you expect?”

  • Asafum@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    100
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    There was an article celebrating the fact that we’re on our way to having the first trillionare.

    I wanted to die. It’s so insanely fucking disgusting

    • Obi@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      No Japanese on the list, but we could make some nice fois gras with Bernard I’m sure.

  • stormesp@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    A boring distopia is already even a single person having more than a single billion.

    • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      It’s inherently antisocial. You no longer have to play by the social contract with that kind of wealth/power.

      It’s a grave failure with our economic system that billionaires have been permitted to come about

    • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Yup, there was that post a while back, like you reach a billion, you get a plaque that says “congrats you won capitalism” and then they start at 0 again

      • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        Not even a billion, as soon as you’re in 8 figures you have more than a reasonable person can spend in a lifetime. Cap it at 50 million, every cent more goes towards public infrastructure and welfare

        Or we could do away with capitalism entirely. Just saying

        • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          4 days ago

          Capitalism does have some uses, like which TV you want to buy, but it needs to be heavily regulated.

              • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                4 days ago

                The fact that we live under capitalism today? People can grow crops without feudalism as well, but it’s not up to the individual serfs to decide if they want farm for themselves and their community, or for their liege lord. But the very same factories that produce consumer goods with a profit incentive today, can do the same for the benefit of the people tomorrow.

                • deafboy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  very same factories that produce consumer goods with a profit incentive today, can do the same for the benefit of the people tomorrow.

                  Yes. Until everyone ends up in poverty, because over time, nobody knows what to make and how much. The longer the supply chain the stronger the effect will be.

      • Illuminostro@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        I think we need to return to some of the old Pagan practices, like if you became King, you were sacrificed to the gods exactly 1 year later, and a new King took power. I propose that once you hit 1 billion, you are sacrificed to Mammon, to go live with him in the Great Bank In The Sky.

  • e$tGyr#J2pqM8v@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    If you have a lot of money

    • you contributed a lot to society
    • you took a lot from society

    If you’re a successful businessman and you want to contribute, perhaps you could lower the prices of your products, perhaps you could give shares to your employees who do all the work. Not only is it efficient for them to have a stake in the company, it’s also only fair. Not doing so is unfair. We won’t celebrate your ‘success’, a successful thief is a thief nonetheless. You doing so-called ‘philanthropy’ won’t do any good either. Money is power, you exerting your power over us isn’t the moral thing to do. It’s still wrong to the core. Sure, people voluntarily giving money to all sorts of causes is a beautiful thing, but only if money is reasonably distributed among people in the first place. If you take money from society on a large scale and then exert this power, than undoubtedly your views and interests are disproportionately represented. Your intentions are dubious, because if you intended well, why did you keep all the money and power for yourself in the first place? It’s likely that you’re a power hungry maniac. But even if you’re somehow naively unaware of this and truly have the noblest of intentions with your philanthropy, then it’s still a ludicrous idea that this would be an efficient way to distribute money. It’s quite obvious that if everyone got a say in where the money goes, that the distribution of assets would better represent what society deems important. It’s only logical that if you get to distribute the money, it will go to things you deem important. If you think that makes sense, it can only mean that you deem yourself wiser, more moral, than all of humanity combined. It means you are a narcissist. It’s not unlikely that you are, people who are successful money-wise, often think that life it a money-game and they’re the winning players. And they have won because they work hard and are clever. The thing is, life isn’t a money-game, people have moral compasses and strive towards others goals than making money. And even if it was a money-game, you’ve not won because you’re so smart and hard-working, it is in a very large part due to your luck. That’s not an allegation, it’s a logical fact. People don’t have the same starting positions. Being a billionaire is morally wrong, even if you give all of it away later in life.

  • Brosplosion@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Is this inflation corrected? Cause an arbitrary line across 7 years of inflation is gonna be crossed…

    • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      No, thats a good point because its not inflation corrected its just an archived page. A dollar in 2017 is worth 1.28 today. So yes, in today’s dollars there would have been 4 people above 100 billion in 2017.

    • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      I don’t think we had 250% inflation in the last 7 years

      We certainly didn’t have a 250% increase in wages or median wealth in the last 7 years

      They are parasites and criminals

      • Brosplosion@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        These sorts of stats are misleading and can erode the footing of the argument you are making. Showing the numbers adjusted for inflation is damning enough.

        We’ve had around 60% inflation over the past seven years, does it explain all their increases? No.

        But not including that information and saying “but number is bigger!” Just makes your argument look weak when it could be statistically sound.

  • 3aqn5k6ryk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Pardon my ignorance. I dont follow these kind of news. BUT, why the hell is musk is no 1? What has he done? Last i heard this manchild is running down twitter, tesla with cybertruck fiasco. Is it from spacex?

    I mean, zuckerberg and bezos basically create meta and amazon.

    • psycho_driver@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      5 days ago

      There are probably several Russian Oligarchs missing from this list because their wealth is mostly dark money. Rumor has it Putin is the wealthiest man in the world and has been for some time.