• DaddleDew@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    105
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    “BuT hE’s WoRtH tHaT mUcH bEcAuSe Of AlL tHe HaRd WoRk He’S bEeN dOiNg!”

    You tell that to his delivery drivers who can’t even scratch their nose while driving or that 1984-dystopia-esque automated surveillance system he puts in their vehicles flags it as “distracted driving” and punishes them.

    Oh and they don’t even make enough to raise a family.

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      2 months ago

      Those fucking people man…

      Tell me again how these CEOs with multi-million golden parachutes were worth that if they’re bailing from a company they failed?

      • ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        39
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Elon is the prefect example of how little actual work a CEO does.

        • CEO of SpaceX - Elon Musk
        • Chairman and CTO of Twitter - Elon Musk
        • CEO of Telsa - Elon Musk
        • President of Musk Foundation - Elon Musk
        • CEO of xAI - Elon Musk

        What does Elon do all day? Be a piece of a shit on Twitter. If CEO work was so demanding, there would be no way Elon would be the CEO of three different companies, chairman of the Board and CTO of one company, and a president of a “charitable” organization.

        Reporting by The New York Times found that in 2022, the Musk Foundation gave away $230 million less than the minimum required by law to maintain tax-deductible status, and that in 2021 and 2022 over half the foundation’s funds went to causes connected to Musk, his family, or his businesses.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk#Musk_Foundation

      • DaddleDew@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Because them saying they’re “worth” that is just mental gymnastics to make themselves feel better about abusing the position of power to leech as much money from as many people as possible for themselves.

    • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      2 months ago

      There is absolutely no amount of hard work that deserves that much money, absolutely none. You could run a marathon every single day for 50 years and I still wouldn’t say you deserved that much money.

    • Nightwatch Admin@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      They don’t need to make enough money to raise a family… they don’t get enough time off to do so in the first place.

    • suction@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Not to defend the ultra-rich, but even most CEOs of small, shitty companies will not consider their employees’ well-being for one second if they they can the line go up for another half milimeter. It’s not helpful to consider just the most extreme cases like Bezos as “bad” and the low-tier ones as “not quite as bad”.

  • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    2 months ago

    You could confiscate 99.9% of the wealth of the top 100 richest people in the world, and they would all still be wealthier than 99% of the world’s population.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      This ignores a few other components.

      People in structures doing actual evil don’t need to be rich themselves. They are fine with using their masters’ property or power to feed their own ego. And a lot of what happens using those can’t be directly controlled by said masters, but is accepted as normal side effect.

      Confiscation of wealth is not enough. Borders and passages should be erected again where they have eroded, for individual freedom, including that of speech, individual property rights, and individual responsibility mirroring those. And impediments, like legal formalism, fear of responsibility, and cuckold culture of spectators getting their dopamine dose by reacting to posts in social media instead of action, should be cleared out.

      That wealth is a symptom, not the core issue. The core issue is that societies are vulnerable to said cuckoldry.

      It’s not “capitalism”. The way Jeff Bezos accumulated his power has the “capitalism” component much proportionally smaller than that in your honest earnings. “Capitalism” is a (not the worst in existence) system with rules for you, while for Jeff it’s a much more general system with no clear rules, the cloak and dagger macchiavellian stuff, the way Soviet elite power dynamics worked.

  • Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    2 months ago

    He doesnt make that in actual money tho. Rich people’s value are vibes based egregors summoned through the stock market. So, in a similar vein, if the stock market crashes and never recovers, he loses most of his money. This is why I propose ripping down Wallstreet to starve the machine.

    • LoreleiSankTheShip@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      2 months ago

      He’d still have a lot of property to his name, a lot of other assets and stuff that aren’t tied to an arbitrary stock market. Even if you crash it, mansions and luxury cars would still be very valuable. He will never not be a billionaire due to that.

      That is, unless you redistribute his wealth. Then yeah, he wouldn’t be filthy rich anymore.

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Very true, but you have to be able to sell those assets to gain from them. If the stock market is erased you can’t sell your yacht to another exploiter because their networth is decimated too and they can no longer borrow off anything but physical assets, and now they also have a massive “income” stream that is now down so borrowing is more risky. We coulda had a bad bitch of a society, instead we let the rich turn us all into Mammon zombies.

      • lordnikon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        well it’s worse than that becase most of those houses and other assets were bought for the most part from loans taken out at very low interest rates against the stock he has in his company’s and other shares in his portfolio . The stocks on whole give better return than that interest rate. So it’s free money they can spend an they don’t even have to sell their stock and pay taxes on the returns just the dividends at a way lower rate that any working person. the way this is setup it becomes impossible for him to spend money fast enough for him to actually lose more money than he gained.

        • viking@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          As long as the loans aren’t paid off though, running the stock into the ground would result in margin calls. An empire built on borrowed money with loans secured only through the value of the empire itself can be a fragile construct.

          • lordnikon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            yep why do you think they freak out so much when the market drops and post shit online to inflate stock emerald mine dipshit Xboy is famous for that kind of shit.

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Love both of these, but going after the stock market is how you kick billionaires in the balls. Then you redistribute their assets to serve society instead of society serving their assets.

    • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      If you can borrow against that at any time you want (read: 90% of billionaires), then you have that money effectively liquid and untaxed.

      Then they will take out a bigger loan to pay off the existing loan and as such, pay almost nothing in taxes, the stocks that they borrow against grow faster than the interest on their loans, and they can repeat this process until they die where their debt just gets eaten by taxpayers because they transfer assets at the right time to children and then their estate will pay back the debt after death (just transfer stock ownership to lenders probably)

      Even if the stock market crashes during this time, they can declare bankruptcy, free themselves of their debt, and then sell assets and they already have a huge golden elevator ready to bring them back up.

    • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      2 months ago

      You don’t want the stock market destroyed. That is how retirements are funded as well.

      You want to restrict ownership of an individual stock. Limit them to 5% or so. Also make every stock have 1 vote, no exceptions.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 months ago

        You don’t want the stock market destroyed. That is how retirements are funded as well.

        Thus illustrating [one of] the ulterior motive[s] behind replacing pensions with 401(k)s.

        • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          2 months ago

          Pensions are funded by the stock market as well. Pension funds are some the largest landlords as well.

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        No, the stock market needs to go. It is the primary vector of mass exploitation and binds us all to these immoral chains. It makes Mr and Mrs Greenbury down the street as complacent in Nestle’s filfthy acts as the CEOs themselves, because everyone is drooling for line go up, nothing else. Wealth chasing is the heroin addiction for Mother Terra, and we will chase this dragon until the world is charred.

        • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          2 months ago

          The stock market is how pensions are funded. That means the largest loss of wealth to the middle class.

          • Sanctus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Thats great, you can still save pensions. Use the wealth you are redistributing to ensure pensions. The billionaires have enough for all of us to retire. I’m not advocating for instant destruction. I’m advocating for removing it and replacing it with a system that promotes cooperation and resource efficiency instead of one that solely focuses on financial gain.

            • bizarroland@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 months ago

              The stock market is one of the reasons why we don’t have pensions anymore. Companies realize that it’s a lot cheaper to pawn off the responsibility of covering your own retirement on the people who work their entire lives for you.

              • Sanctus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                2 months ago

                They actually gave the job to a bunch of sycophants who transform it into some immaterial form using strange magic. It is unclear if this will hinder or benefit you. The sycophants use their commission to buy blow.

      • bstix@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Well, those suggestions would destroy the stock market. Nobody would ever register their company on the stock market if it meant giving up 95% of the control.

        • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          2 months ago

          Really which company do you have more than 1 vote per share or have more than 5%? Very few people are given either.

          • bstix@feddit.dk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            All non-stock companies which is the majority of all companies. That’s the problem. When a company applies for a stock market registration, it means that they’re selling off control and profit sharing of the company in order to gain investments to expand.

            All companies start with a single or two owners. The transition from owning everything to including others won’t happen if it means giving up to the majority of control, whether that’s 50% or 5/95%. That’s why many companies get stuck on 51%. It only ever comes over 50% when someone dies or makes a mature decision of letting others control “their” company.

  • Krauerking@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    2 months ago

    Meh I know this one.

    I like, If you earned $2,000 a minute, for every minute of you simply existing you would be a millionaire by halfway through the day, but to be a billionaire it would take you a full year of $2,000 a minute.

    To be Jeff Bezos wealthy it would still take you 195 YEARS OF MAKING $2,000 A MINUTE

  • w3dd1e@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    2 months ago

    You wouldn’t even make the top ten richest people in the world list.

  • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    By the time Harris or Trump finish out the next presidency you’ll be poorer and he’ll be making $10,000,00 an hour.

      • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Right you are. Luckily it appears most people can derive my meaning by context.

        But I’ll edit it if that missing zero is too confusing for you.

        • smeenz@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          There’s no need for that attitude. Keep your sarcasm and defensive knee jerk reactions on reddit.

    • Frozengyro@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      If you can live you life on 42000 I’d be impressed. I assume you mean 4x what you need yearly for a good life, daily? That’s more reasonable, but I think you’d still struggle at 42k a year these days.

      • viking@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Location, location, location. I’m living a great life, missing nothing, and my monthly expenses are below $1500 a month (excluding travels, including medical insurance). That’s for a 2 person household in a 1600ft² 4BR rental house nearby a larger city (350k population).

        • Frozengyro@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Is this in the US? If so I’m impressed. I’ve lived on that much myself, but it was out of necessity and one decent sized emergency and I’m not sure what I’d have done.

      • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        8 / 4 = 2

        Workday has ~ 8 hours, 8 * 2 = 16 (million)

        Let’s assume 45 work years (20 to 65), that’s 350k a year.

        Scratch that, half of it would be good income.

      • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah, especially if you don’t have a car. Going across town to buy one little knick knack can be an all day affair, with 2 public transit fares included.

        This may explain why Amazon is much more popular in North America than Europe: public transit. So if you want to stick it to Jeff, work for better public transit and more walkable cities!

        • PenguinMage@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Sadly not having a car is my big reason. Bus stops don’t always get me where I could grab the items I need… and fuck I hate amazon.

        • Tiefling IRL@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Also a lot of areas in major cities don’t have large general shopping stores, like Target. It becomes an hour long trip and transfer while hauling whatever you’re buying.

      • problematicPanther@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah, convenience is a big deal, but I think it’s time for people to grow a conscience and take an inconvenience if it means not supporting assholes like bezos.

        • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          Convenience is an umbrella term. There are a thousand different reasons people choose convenience and not all of them are synonymous with laziness. Single parents, working multiple jobs, with disabilities that limit mobility, lack of a car, not enough time to make a trip on public transit, lack of public transit options in their area, and countless more.

          The ability to just choose to take a bunch of extra time, or take a car to go pick up an item, is a luxury and a privilege. And all that just to spite bezos and make you happy? Not reasonable.

    • 0ops@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      They’re getting worse. Packages are always late, reviews can’t be trusted because they are mixed with unrelated products and can be bought anyway. At this point it’s momentum that’s keeping people there.

    • somethingp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m addition to convenience Amazon has just killed off a lot of retail options. The only competitor left with brick and mortar is Walmart and somewhat best buy for electronics. Very hard to find those small specialty stores nowadays for little random things unless you live in a big metropolitan area. Even stores like Walmart now will have the same products by a million different brands instead of having an actual variety of products.

  • Ziglin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    If you spent some of that time a little too close to a black hole you might have a chance though! Obviously you just wouldn’t be working hard enough!

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I would simply invest a small amount of money into all of the fastest growing equities every day for the next 20 years. Alternatively, I’d just get the NSA to pay me $600M/year for access to some servers that cost me around $50M/year to operate.

  • TCB13@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yeah because making it isn’t only about just waiting for time to pass and money to come it, it is also about compounding.

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    I would have told her that attractiveness can’t make up for a lack of personality, but that Ola guy ain’t wrong either.