1221
submitted 1 week ago by saneekav@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] electric_nan@lemmy.ml 163 points 1 week ago

Let's start with those that profit directly from human suffering.

[-] Allonzee@lemmy.world 86 points 1 week ago

So the entire Healthcare, agriculture, and processed food industries.

And obviously Ticketmaster.

[-] dumbass@leminal.space 16 points 1 week ago

Yeah for sure, but we can still plan for tomorrow.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 118 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Edit: I'm using him as an example of an other billionaire who is constantly defended even though he owns 6 mega yatchs and a few submarines costing him an estimated 75 to 100 million a year just in maintenance. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[-] A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 85 points 1 week ago

Look I love Gabe as much as anyone but nobody earns a billion dollars

[-] CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world 38 points 1 week ago

Especially when steam could have a sliding scale for fees where developers with fewer sales could earn more profit from the sale which would greatly benefit the indie developers.

Instead it has the opposite structure where fees decrease as you sell many millions in revenue which has the opposite effect.

[-] dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net 37 points 1 week ago

And the perfect counterpart is another rotund fuzzy tech guy, Steve Wozniak. The Woz, who isn’t a billionaire in part because when Steve Jobs decided to fuck over a bunch of Apple employees before the IPO Woz gave them some of his shares. Woz, who spends his time in part video chatting with elementary school classes and talking to them about technology.

[-] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago

To be fair

He did get the steam deck made, so that was kinda cool.

But maybe owning 6 yachts is a little less cool.

Unless the sub and boats were like research vessels he funds, that would be cool

But they aren't.

Why can't billionaires dump their money into funding scientific research? It's not like there aren't scientists out there with plenty of research to be done.

Or even maybe wherever he lives, he could like, fund the entire county school districts for the rest of existence and no one would have to worry about taxes.

Or maybe regularly cancel the medical debt of Valve employees and their families.

Like how fucking hard is it to redistribute your own wealth?

Like fucking Christ, that's the part I don't understand. They complain about taxes and shit at the top, but they do absolutely fuck all to make things better for large swaths of people. Or if they do, it's after they die and $200m gets donated to a university and it prevents next year's tuition from increasing.

[-] EldritchFeminity 13 points 1 week ago

I think part of it is the form that that wealth exists in. Not defending billionaires in any way, but they don't have stacks of cash lying around. The way that they live is that their money is in various forms of equity that passively increase in value, like stocks and houses, which they take loans against in order to pay for things. Then, they take out more loans to pay off the previous and repeat until they die and the debt disappears due to legal loopholes.

Stuff like the yachts and all the other crazy expensive stuff is one thing, but to redistribute the wealth, it's not as simple as handing out cash to everybody (and I think turning all their mansions into subsidized housing instead of selling them would be more beneficial anyway).

I think incentivizing them to do more useful things with that cash and disincentivize them from simply hoarding it in various forms would be a decent short-term solution to the issue without having to put in much effort on the government's part, but I never expect to see that happen.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 week ago

Are you presenting him as an example of a good billionaire? Cause still, nah.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It was not my intention, I edited my comment to make it clearer.

[-] spujb@lemmy.cafe 112 points 1 week ago

Hi, Swiftie here 🙋‍♀️

There are no good billionaires. Taylor Swift is not a good person due to her business practices. I have no defense of her and I would never say “she is one of the good ones.” I and most of the Swiftie circles I run in wish that she would practice equitable compensation in her tours (where she gets the vast majority of her profit), among other areas.

Taylor Swift is a capitalist, and that’s bad. There are thousands of artists and laborers being exploited by her every performance. All those laborers, stage hands, designers, arena staff, etc should have a say in how the massive revenue generated is distributed, and they do not get that say. That is bad.

As a majority male space, Lemmy has a tendency to slide a bit toward dunking on women and majority women’s spaces because you may not be aware that many leftist Swifties are just as critical of Swift as other billionaires. This post is a good example of that. (If you feel bad or called out by this, don’t stress it. I just want to gently course correct the conversation a tad 🙂)

[-] AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works 24 points 1 week ago

I appreciate you posting this, it was actually unexpected to see to me and was nice to know.

[-] spujb@lemmy.cafe 11 points 1 week ago

i appreciate you leaving the feedback! sometimes i feel like what i say lands on deaf ears so it’s reassuring that my experience can actually get out there :) cheers

[-] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 week ago

I'm not a swiftie, and I'm male, so take my words as you will in that context.

Simply: IMO, it is possible to appreciate someones artistry while disliking their personal value system and actions.

Just because someone is a good artist, does not and should not imply that they are good.

Both liking someone's music and disliking their decisions as a person, can both be true. I hate the plethora of false dichotomy arguments that you can't appreciate music made by a person if that person is considered a bad person. One does not mean the other cannot be true.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] insaneinthemembrane@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

Yep, of all the billionaires, there are so many more men to choose from. So. Many.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] GraniteM@lemmy.world 89 points 1 week ago

It's not a matter of "nobody should be allowed to be ultra wealthy," it's a matter of "nobody should be allowed to be unacceptably poor."

If our civilization can generate wealth at an astronomical rate, then there is no morally defensible reason for anyone to be homeless, hungry, poorly educated, lacking medical care, drinking unsafe water, worked to death, or any of a number of other baseline metrics of civilization. All of those ills exist because wealth is funneled upwards at an unbelievable rate, leading to the existence of billionaires. All of that wealth should be used to raise everyone's standard of living, rather than give a handful of people more power and luxury than ever appeared in Caligula's wet dreams.

Of course the way that you accomplish that is by an exponentially progressive taxation system, and that will... probably make it impractical to be a billionaire, but frankly I think that focusing on helping the bottom end of the economic ladder is more productive than just talking about how it should be illegal to have more than a given amount of wealth.

[-] LANIK2000@lemmy.world 34 points 1 week ago

I'm still surprised that taxing the rich is such a difficult bill to pass. Assuming we live in a democracy, the 1% shouldn't be able to have such sway over the population.

[-] fallingcats@discuss.tchncs.de 29 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Might have something to do with almost all relevant politicians being in the 1%. Maybe. Possibly.

[-] Burninator05@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

Lots of people don't understand taxes and lots of others think they'll end up rich someday and then it will affect them.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] UpperBroccoli 12 points 1 week ago

It’s not a matter of “nobody should be allowed to be ultra wealthy,”

It kind of is. the more wealth someone has, the more power they have over other people's life. They can buy laws and regulations, or have them removed. This is never a good thing. Billionaires simply must not exist. In fact, billionaires only exist because we have so many poor people. They profit from other people's hard labour and misery. If it was not such a historically charged term, I would call them parasites.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 88 points 1 week ago

As a swiftie, I can say you're right. However, there's also no such thing as a purely good or purely bad person, and liking a billionaire does not make someone good or bad. People, it turns out, are complex.

I can love Taylor's music while also criticizing her for her excessive personal jet use and massive pollution problem.

I think if we stop making it a binary decision that more people will start opening up about changes need to make. In Taylor's case, most Swifties would never dare say anything negative about her for fear of others in the fandom thinking they aren't true fans, and vis versa, I'm sure people here will read this as I must support billionaires because I like her music. No, complex multifaceted opinions are valid.

I think we should abolish ICE vehicles. It doesn't mean I think I need to yell at family members who pull up in their 02 Camry because they can't afford to upgrade.

[-] baldingpudenda@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

I recently had this conversation with my sister who's been a huge swiftie for years. Her reaction:

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 week ago

Disagree here. I'd argue being good and being a billionaire are mutually exclusive. You can be good before you are a billionaire (rare) but it's not possible once you enter that class.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[-] anticurrent@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Those billionaires are being propped by stupid people buying exorbitant ticket prices to see their idols dancing from a mile a way. I blame the populace for this. you can make them irrelevant without even spending a penny.

[-] drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

As someone in the entertainment business, those performers don't like ticket master either. Or at least on the level I am at.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[-] beefbot 29 points 1 week ago

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?

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

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.

[-] dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net 12 points 1 week ago

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 28 points 1 week ago

There may not be good ones, but like everything there are different grades.

Someone who became a billionaire selling weapons to conflict zones after pushing them into conflict is a lot worse than an artist that is popular and actually works for their riches.

[-] MellowYellow13@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago

If you have billions there are no excuses, dont defend this shit.

[-] sparr@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago

That person was already evil before they became a billionaire.

The amount of evilness from being a billionaire, separate from how they got there, is approximately the same for both of them.

Nobody "works for" a billion dollars.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 27 points 1 week ago

I totally agree, but also the pop star billionaires are the least offensive type. If you're targeting them before the other billionaires, you got played and are doing it wrong. The richest most politically powerful billionaires are the biggest threat to freedom.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago

I wouldn't call her a good billionaire, but I think she's as benign as billionaires get. At least she does things like pay her employees a good wage and gets people involved in the political process.

And, as far as I know, she isn't responsible for anyone's deaths.

I'm sure she still stepped on a lot of necks up the pyramid, but compared to a shit ton of other billionaires out there...

[-] DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago

Billionaires can't be benign. It's impossible to make a billion dollars in a lifetime without taking more than you deserve. Someone overpaid for the product or someone was underpaid for the work (probably both). Billionaires prey on that loss, and it's not as if they are Robin Hood giving back to the poor. If that's not malignant, I don't know what is.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

You could also argue there are no good millionaires by the same logic.

The existence of billionaires is a systemic problem, largely not a personal failing.

I'm not a swiftie, but the message here should be "We need better redistributive institutions" or "We need a new economic system", not "Artist being an unexceptional artist (in terms of industry behavior) is BAD because she is one of the more successful ones"

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] return2ozma@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago

I'll share it again...

That time Oprah and Ellen cosplayed as poor people by going to the bank...

https://youtu.be/HbwARJNjI3M

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] angrystego@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

Ok, so Taylor Swift seems to get the billionaire hate here. I'm wondering, when it comes to successful artists, what's the opinion on Dolly. She's not a billlionaire, but she is worth several hundred millions, so it's close enough. She seems to be beloved by almost everyone.

[-] A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago

Dolly gives free books to every kid, helped rebuild Gatlinburg after the fires, and is now helping rebuild East TN after the hurricane. Also, water is free at Dollywood.

She gets a pass, but she'll still have to give up most of her wealth when the revolution comes.

[-] CatZoomies@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Taylor Swift is known very well for donating. She donates millions to food banks in every city she’s toured. She also donates on a lot of those gofundme fundraisers, one in which particular really moved her and she penned the song “Ronan”. An incredibly sad and tragic song that will make parents cry, knowing she’s singing about a baby that died despite medical complications, brought Ronan’s mom at some of her concerts, and of course donated to the cause. She regularly funds gofundme campaigns, so overall she seems like a pretty decent person.

I hate the use of her private jet and constant flights, but if you’re that big and hated by some people, then she can’t take regular airplanes because she can be assaulted and murdered. I wish there was some mega jumbo jet that was shared by the rich and did stops in certain cities, like as if it was “public transit” for the rich. That would be great because at least the uber wealthy would be a bit safer from being murdered that way while also certainly cutting down on significant emissions. I’d still hate it and want them to cut back more, but it would be no contest how beneficial sharing one jet versus 100 of them constantly flying everywhere would be. Some of these rich assholes fly insupplies from other countries, exotic food, etc. That pisses me off.

Taylor shouldn’t be a billionaire and I’d love for her to donate and help people out more than she’s already doing. Maybe one day people will see Swift is a bit better than other billionaires, having worked her ass off during the Eras Tour while also gifting millions of dollars to all the dancers and her staff that supported the concert. I went to her Eras tour concert with my spouse, and holy hell that was a phenomenal concert. She basically danced and sang constantly for the entire 3.5 hours or whatever. And she did that back to back for two years? Absolutely insane how much work that would take. I don’t think she gets enough credit, as I do love her music but she’s very hated for some reason.

Taylor should not have that much wealth. It’s insane. I hope she continues to give it away and donate even more than she’s already doing. Would love if she funded progressive parties and stuff like that, to give us more of a choice than the Democrats or the Pure Evil party. Maybe one day she’d be held in high regard like Dolly Parton, but let’s see. For now, I think she’s “one of the better billionaires”, but she shouldn’t be one. They shouldn’t have all the wealth.

Edit, made some slight corrections as I whipped this up on mobile.

[-] not_that_guy05@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

You leave Dolly the fuck alone.

You hear.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] bss03@infosec.pub 10 points 1 week ago

I understand why Queen B or T Swift aren't doing it, but the only moral activity (beyond survival tasks) that a "good billionaire" can be engaged in is redistributing their wealth to marginalized workers.

You can figure out your next album / tour or how to benefit your friends and family once you get to 999M USD.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] MellowYellow13@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Swifties triggered.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2024
1221 points (100.0% liked)

memes

10636 readers
1946 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS