This is fucking insane.
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
It’s fucking disgusting. Little more than a manifestation of greed mixed with sociopathic and narcissistic behavior.
The worst part is that there are people who think these deserve that money. This is all on the backs of actual workers. And from a society that they aren’t paying their fair share of.
Should these three individuals be wealthy? Sure. Should they have ever been allowed to accumulate anywhere near this much personal wealth on the backs of literally millions of other people? Fuck no.
This money should have been forcefully spread around to those workers over the course of decades. And a good chunk back to the society that made it all possible.
Instead, these sycophants hoarded more than they could ever need or even want, while keeping wages far too low and paying very little (effective rate) in taxes.
The graphic is quite outdated (2019 for top 3) and the situation got much worse. The latest datapoint on the website I could find was from 2021, indicating a wealth of 683 billions of the top 5 US citizens.
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.
He earns it quicker than he can spend or give it away
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.
load more comments
(2 replies)
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.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Yeah, money makes money. Its a feedback loop thats been running rampant for centuries.
And that’s why a progressive tax system makes sense, unless you want wealth to become concentrated.
The US’s tax rate was once truly progressive, with top marginal rates well over 70%, even reaching over 90%. And guess what happened during that time. The middle class exploded and so did the economy overall.
Now the wealthiest pay a LOWER effective rate than most taxpayers. This is a regressive system, favoring the rich and creating more inequality. Allowing for increasing concentration of wealth and a devastation of the middle class.
Money making money does not have to result in the insane concentrations of wealth we see today. People can still get rich and be rich. But effective tax policy and regulations can be used to create a society that’s better for most.
There's a meta problem here: once you make enough money, it becomes increasingly profitable to pay people to find ways to avoid paying taxes via loopholes. Worse yet, you can pay people to rig the system in your favour. A lot of people think this is the inevitable outcome of capitalist systems.
Absolutely. Money and corruption often go hand in hand, regardless of the ruling system.
The US has previously been a great example of how socialist policies can be implemented as part of a capitalist system. World-leading programs like public education, retirement security, and healthcare in old age; even environmental protection and workers’ rights fit in here. This was when politicians actually had turnover and things like Citizens United and Super PACs weren’t a thing.
But the US is now a great example of how infection can spread and destroy even the best laid systems, leaving us with an oligarchy of nearly unfettered capitalism with constant degradation of the socialist policies. Where the money from the wealthy flows directly into our governance. And it’s utterly toxic.
It’s time to shift the power back to the masses. It’s already been done under this structure. It just needs a 21st century kick in the ass to get it up to (1) stop reversing all the incredible progress made in the 20th century and (2) get a handle 21st century issues like global tax evasion, housing markets upended by investment schemes, wealth distributed entirely through shareholder value, etc. These problems are all solvable under the current system, it just takes lawmakers who give a flying fuck.
Money and corruption often go hand in hand, regardless of the ruling system.
What do you conclude about rulership, if its interests are separate from the interests of the disempowered?
Where the money from the wealthy flows directly into our governance.
Why do the wealthy leverage state power toward their particular interests, and what do you imagine would stop them from doing so?
stop reversing all the incredible progress made in the 20th century
Why was progress made during certain periods, and why was it later reversed during others?
These problems are all solvable under the current system, it just takes lawmakers who give a flying fuck.
Why are lawmakers indifferent to the struggles of the masses, and what would cause them to become more engaged?
I feel uncomfortable with "money makes money".
Those with money use money to make those without money make money for those with money.
Reading Kapital be like
We don't need guillotines. Just account numbers and PINs.
I'm sure there is no such amount of money on there accounts. All this digits are counted on the price of shares
We could say, *We don't need to seize the means of production. We just need to seize the shares from the shareholders."
Such comments seem to sidestep the deeper analysis.
Beheadings are permanent.
Well I'm sure if they can make themselves billionaires once they can do it again, so clearly the real answer is to just let them grow infinitely and prune their profits every few years.
And, of course, their taxes are "too high" and need to be reduced.
Don't worry, they'll trickle down out of the goodness of their heart and not hoard it all for themselves. Trust me, bro.
Aaany minute now...
Wait! I think I hear it! Like you said!.......................... oops. nope. sorry, my bad. Turns out that was another forest fire.
Around the same time, crypto will make traditional money worthless. The only wealthy ones will be those who invested early. Trust me.
The good old days when it was the top 3, instead of just Musk alone, who own more than the bottom half combined...
You're really going to be unhappy when Musk becomes crowned as king.
More than, even.
Create a delivery cooperative and let Jeff's fortune crumble.
Make Linux gaming a thing and see Bill's fortune decline.
Create competition for the top consumer brands and Warren's money is gone.
These men are rich because the free time fought for with strikes and such is spent watching TV.
It's joever
May i have 50 dollars more this year?
No there is no budget.
Oh OK.