1162
this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2024
1162 points (92.4% liked)
memes
10673 readers
2838 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- [email protected] : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- [email protected] : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- [email protected] : Linux themed memes
- [email protected] : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Posting women as the targets is such easy pickings and it’s so fuckin lazy. Where’s the white guys? Why aren’t they the face of this, since they’re the hand choking the poor?
You're missing the point. The point is that people always defend TS because they like her but she is still a billionaire. You can't just snap your fingers and turn this into a conversation about sexism because that's not related to the point in the least.
As someone else pointed out a while ago, Dolly Parton isn’t a billionaire because she tirelessly gives away her wealth to the poor.
It’s not the same level, but there are other musicians who have fought to keep ticket price affordable for their fans, Minor Threat/Fugazi being the most notable but far from the only ones.
Yeah and there probably is a gender cultural component to Dolly being so kind. But to the commenter I am responding to, I stand by what I said.
So... The endgame here is that billionaires CAN exist, but any of them who don't give away their wealth are assholes? So are we all here on these posts just to peer pressure billionaires to give away money?
That's certainly going to be a helpful approach.
Essentially yes. The ethical thing to do with that amount of money is to redistribute it to people that need it more. Whether that is by donation to charity, or raising wages and investing in worker protections in the company that you run, or funding schools and development in places that need them, or paying your fair share of taxes, emphasis here because most billionaires got that way by lobbying tax code in their favor - they've reached a level of net worth that genuinely boggles the mind and couldn't be wasted in full in a dozen lifetimes if you tried to.
I'm fine with people being wealthy, keep a million in your bank account, hell keep ten million, I don't care. But there needs to be a line somewhere. There needs to be a point where we can say, okay, well done, you have Won At Capitalism. Here is your medal. All further profits are taxed at 99% income. We cannot let individuals amass so much of the supply of money that the nation can no longer support itself, which is what's happening. Money is the life blood of society and all that blood is being concentrated in particular spots, starving the rest of the body. Money needs to flow to create a healthy economy, but it's stagnating.
I don't fundamentally disagree with you. I would contend that the problem is not that billionaires exist, it's that there is a legal path to becoming a billionaire.
This post is a combo shame of other poors like us who like a product generated by a billionaire and a yell at the sky because TS (and whoever the other person was) aren't reading it anyway. You can be mad at billionaires who sit on their hoard and don't give it to society for free, or we can all say enough is enough and make it a call to action to DO something. Like vote and participate in government for example.
You also can't snap your fingers and take everyone off the street. Sure, you can pay for places and help, but people aren't obliged to take it. Unless you're arguing for forcing that situation?
I understand the argument is simply "billionaires shouldn't exist", but that's a job for the government by way of taxation. There's no reason to point fingers at TS, she sells something people want really bad for some reason. Instead, point your finger at any of your asshole friends who don't vote or show up to help the cause.
Otherwise what? TS sucks because she's disgustingly rich, and the only way out is to give it all away? And then of course all other billionaires will follow suit?
These posts really seem like nothing more than "it's cathartic to yell at the sky, and it's even better if some people like the sky".
Man, sometimes people have a point even if other points exist. The point is that it's a bad thing to ignore one example of badness because you want to. If you wanna paint this as a moral judgement of TS, ok fine, but my issue here isn't so much with her but with people who want to have exceptions to their own moral code. And yes that moral code in this case is the job of the government.
Ok fair enough. That wasn't my read of it.
When your bank balance is higher than the GDP of a small country, gender is irrelevant.
One could also argue that posting a man as a homeless is ignoring countless homeless woman and countless homeless trans people.
One of them just got shot, remember?