“Temporality embarrassed [mb]illionaires” in their minds.

they have been isolated by our mass media environment being hyper individualized, and gaslit into believing that their overlords and our overlords are a different set, and that we worship ours and the only counter is to empower theirs to combat ours. it will possibly take years of deprogramming to get them out of this. the best thing you can do is produce and disseminate propaganda that normalizes a true narrative: that left and right, male and female, islam and christianity and judaism, Black and white, rural and urban, gay and straight, are all distractions from up and down. how we fight our oppressors is through solidarity of the underclass. blaming people instead of helping people different from ourselves is how we lose.

you won’t be able to reach all of them, but you will reach some of them. they really don’t know they’ve been tricked

A distinction without a difference. One is the process, the other its outcome.

Obesity is a problematic state for an entity to be in, and attempts to reframe it as normal only manifest as harm.

Where I see potential validity in criticism is the flawed definitions used for medical classification, but that’s an issue for the medical profession to reckon with and address.

I think it’s just meant as a way to reverse the usual assumption that it’s a desirable state, it puts it in terms that imply you have too much and it’s not good for you.

No, they will. The underclass is the implied threat of violence against you for not surrendering your productivity and your own meagre scraps of surplus value to them as their slaves.

It serves their purpose to make you homeless to ensure others continue to grind themselves to death.

it’s a task for all individuals.

if I had a few billion I could either live in extravagant wealth, or end homelessness AND live in extravagant wealth.

it’s a choice every single billionaire makes.

The rich take many steps to reduce their taxes to nothing on all levels, including lobbying, loopholes, offshore banking, shell corporations, money laundering, fraud, etc. It’s absolutely their individual fault for not contributing proportionately.

as if the ones on top are living the ‘right’ way, or are ‘better’ somehow.

Media literacy at an all time low. How on earth do you come to the conclusion that the people sitting on platforms literally weighing down on the lower classes are supposed to be better?

Okay, well, you draw it to a sufficient enough standard and then we’ll use that one instead.

It’s not “higher = better” but the level above suppresses / deceives the level below. And the higher up you go, the fewer people inhabit a level.

I mean you just made another metaphor but it’s more weird and doesn’t work

without loopholes

Implying loopholes are part of every law’s original vision?

I apologize if it could have been worded better.

Here is my train of thought:

By removing a job from the labor market, they are essentially removing an entire salary from the economy. Normally, that employee would be expecting to find another job. With entire industries are removing a crazy number of jobs, the economy would not be expected to be able to provide another job to all of those workers.

I believe there should be a penalty to the company for eliminating jobs from the economy to slow down or prevent it from happening. I would tax the corporation the full salary of the job that they eliminated. We would use that money to fund for UBI.

I understand UBI should not be conditional and it does not have to be in my example. However, there needs to be a way to fund it. Perhaps if the amount of money collected from the “ai tax” is not enough to provide UBI at the level that is fair to everyone, it should also be funded by the wealth tax that I also mentioned.

I hope that clears it up.

she also has the power to break the harmful status quo of the industry if she so chose. her concerts are bigger than ticketmaster. she could refuse to do ticketsales through ticketmaster and give a lot more power to audiences and artists in the ticketbuying marketplace. she doesn’t because the status quo benefits her because she’s more entertainer than artist

The problem is that Taylor Swift is the only billionaire that I see other leftists simping for. Anyone can say Musk bad and expect a lot of agreement and absolutely no meaningful discussion. If you think there’s no such thing as a good billionaire, but you make exceptions for ones that make music that you like, you need to reflect on why you feel the things you feel. Are you actually morally opposed to billionaires, or do you just personally not like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos?

Of all the rich and influential people in US Taylor Swift is the least of your problems. She’s an absolute winner for opposing the power grabbing ppl. Take it out on Jeff Bozos or Elon or some other undemocratic capitalist.

Tax alone isn’t the answer. if the richest man in the world were to pay 200 billions a year in taxes they would still be a billionaire and if these 200 billions ends up on building a ballroom for politicians not much is achieved.

A billion is an amount of money so ridiculous that it should simply be illegal to have that much.

I don’t think there is a tax authority with the power to do that, not in the west.

Power is the answer, and I’m not sure any current governments have enough of it or the wherewithal to use it, certainly not globally. They seem to be able to find a weak government and lawyer/accountant their ‘wealth’ to appear there.

Maybe somewhere like China can control it’s local billionaire problem more effectively than some others, but I don’t really know.

Ticketmaster actually takes the most from sales to her shows, but yes she specifically could be making better use of her money, such as not renting a super-yacht and not flying everywhere on a private plane.

I’ve seen this viewpoint a lot lately, and while I absolutely agree that tickets to her shows are expensive, when my wife bought tickets to the Eras Tour she was able to get them on the primary market for about $300 each for very good seats. The secondary scalping market was selling the same seats for between $2,000-$4,000 depending on the show, and people were buying them at that price. From a supply and demand perspective, Taylor Swift was absolutely selling those tickets below their true market value.

As for paying her crew more, she also paid out $197 million in bonuses to her crew across the tour. That’s about 10% of tour revenue in bonuses. Not profits, revenue. I’ve been tangentially involved in the entertainment industry since college and have multiple friends directly involved, and I’ve never heard of any other performer giving that much in bonuses to their crew.

Additionally, she donated to food pantries in every city she performed in. While the amounts she donated to each food pantry have not been released, people have worked out that it was likely at least $20k/pantry, based on the number of meals the pantries said they would be able to provide with it. That’s at least $1 million across all the cities, which is obviously not enough, but is far more than most other entertainers do.

I know she gets a lot of flack because she’s so visible in our culture, but in terms of how bad billionaires are, she’s significantly better than a lot of others who fly under the radar. There are over 3,000 billionaires today, according to Forbes, and I’m pretty certain most of them made their money through much worse methods than singing songs and selling overpriced merch to fans. 😛

It’s your interpretation that the meme is intended to be sarcastic or ironic?

That’s exactly the point I think anyone reasonable would make.

It’s not necessarily how they got the money, it’s that they keep it. If I won the lottery, and got a multi-billion dollar payout, I could wire most of that money to a DAF, tell it to distribute the money to 200 different charities I like, and it could be done within the week.

Keeping that much money is a choice. Continuing to spend it all on lavish expenses while the poor suffer is a personal choice, not one they’re forced to bear the consequences of due to their fame.

Woz isn’t even close to being a Billionaire

Power. At some point money stops being what it is to most people and becomes leverage to do things. The truly wealthy don’t have to worry about having the ability to buy things, they shift to being able to influence and control stuff. Now, that can certainly be used for good, so there’s the difference between the perceived good and bad billionaire.

Mostly agreed, but if Woz had gone billionaire, he’d have more to give. I wouldn’t pursue such a life myself though.

Well technically even if they buy a ranch and self publish all their own works with their own studios then their assets are still more welath than most people will ever earn.

The only way to truly get rid of wealth is to give it to somebody else.

I would expect in our lifetime we will see median house price around that mark, it really depends on the country, somewhere it’s enough for a whole extended family but I don’t think that’s universally applicable