this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2023
480 points (96.9% liked)
Socialism
5187 readers
1 users here now
Rules TBD.
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
How the fuck does bill gates still have that much money
Because despite the reputation he's managed to build for himself as a "great philanthropist", he still only gives around 5% of his wealth to charity (which he must do to maintain the "charity" status of his reputation laundering foundation, which clearly does a fantastic job at distracting people from the other 95% of his hoard).
Do you know the original source for the poster? Oldies are goodies. It seems some things never change.
I suppose he must be very frugal with household expenses.
And he doesn't spend money on MacBooks!
Especially on those avocado toasts!
MacBooks on Avocado toast. Sounds lovely.
He earns it quicker than he can spend or give it away. Money makes money ain’t a lie bruh.
Lol, he could give it all away in a matter of minutes, if he wanted to.
I don't doubt he still gets enough active income to keep him living more comfortably than 95% of society, and if he really really must, he could keep a few mil in the bank to keep living comfortably on the interest until he dies, so the lazy fucker still won't ever have to -shock horror- work for a living!
But there is absolutely nothing stopping him giving a significant chunk of his money away other than his own personal greed.
The idea that these people have "too much money to give away" is the most ridiculous take on why they don't I've ever heard..
Melinda convinced Bill to start the BMGF foundation about 23 years ago. They put up what I think was half of their net worth, or $30,000,000,000 (30 billion dollars). Buffet promised to match every yearly expenditure, so roughly another $30 billion. They intend to spend it all down by the time the last trustees dies (probably Melinda). That is like the Rockefeller foundation (still around because compound interest) spent all of the money on charity before he died.
I like that you added all the zeroes so people can get an idea of how insane it is.
Lol, see my reply bellow, and well done on contributing to the billionaires' PR. 👏
They're still multi-hundred billionaires, and you're still closer to being homeless then you are to being a millionaire, but at least you got to enjoy the taste of boot for a minute.
What a take. I would hardly describe that persons comment as bootlicking. Like sure they absolutely should not be able to amass such a fortune and think they can play Odin my redistribution in a way they see fit, but come on. Perhaps you could go ‘bellow’ your nonsense elsewhere.
Please consider referring to the income of billionaires not as earnings.
Earning is based on achievement or merit. Profits are appropriated, claimed, or stolen, but not earned.
I think the semantics of the word “earn” are the least of our worries here mate.
Rather than do that I’d rather go and cut his head off and parade it down 5th avenue.
There may not be such an event in the foreseeable future, or at any rate, not in the next few days or weeks.
However, the request is not based on a worry about semantics, but rather an observation that language influences how people think and feel.
Preferring language such as claim or steal over earn helps emphasize that workers have an interest in eliminating a class who lives by our labor.
Using language as you have done serves to vindicate the class disparity, to erase the class antagonism, and to protect the interests of the owning class.
I can understand that and will try to use different wording.
In this instance I think claim is fine but I would take issue with steal, as I would expect stealing (theft) would most likely have to be backed up by law as stealing is a criminal offence and so for someone to have done that then they should be tried in a court.
Perhaps, the word “earn” could still be used but we could follow it with “through exploitation” as they generally make these profits by exploiting society and their workforce. You can earn things in non-favourable ways after all, no?
The law protects private property.
If you defend the law, how would you overcome the wealth accumulation of billionaires through the legal construct of private property?
I am not defending the law, more pointing out the use of certain words have certain meanings, particularly for media companies to print them would be suicide if they said Bill Gates steals $30B. Whilst we may see that accurate, the current law doesn’t and thus they would be sued and give him more money.
I believe nothing will ever change as the vast majority of people don’t care, are numb to it, or don’t have time to care.
I don’t defend the law and in fact I’ll break the law as much as I can get away with.
I’m apathetic to life really and honestly dying doesn’t seem so bad as this place is a hell hole. And I am lucky enough to work my dream job, have a decent employer (< 10 staff, boss (lead engineer, owner) and works harder than me), average quality of life etc and yet I just can’t go on. Everywhere you look it’s just horrific humans committing horrific acts.
Then you have someone arguing about the semantics of words. Perhaps I’m too cynical now but I don’t see anything changing unless we have a mass revolt and well judging by how laws are changing over protests or how people view protesters I can hardly see a French style revolution happening.
Do the meanings of words vary or change based on rhetorical stance, cultural context, or historic period?
Are mainstream media and mainstream practices the precedent you understand as the one to guide your choices toward the objectives you identify as meaningful?
Yes.
No.
I agree.
Neocolonialism of Africa and patenting the COVID vaccine (which has resulted in countless unnecessary deaths and creation of forever-COVID)