Current Events > Does a "good billionaire" exist iyo?

(+) Yeah! (+)

NightingaleMD posted...

Wow.

A lot of blind and unjustified hate for people in this topic.

Unsurprising from a liberal echochamber that wants everything handed to them without doing any work.

Do you have any actual rebuttals to what people are saying or are you just gonna go "grrrr liberals!" and put your fingers in your ears?

NightingaleMD posted...

Wow.

A lot of blind and unjustified hate for people in this topic.

Unsurprising from a liberal echochamber that wants everything handed to them without doing any work.

The person in this topic holding the most water for billionaires IS a liberal.

All these people saying Gates, he's one of the most savage businessmen to walk the planet. In a business sense he slit so many throats Game of Thrones style.

R_Jackal posted...

To blanket any group of people as purely bad or good is to say you have no understanding of people.

This is just naive. Plain and simple.

It's fine to label all rapists as bad for the sole fact that being a rapist in and of itself requires one to perform the act of rape.

Obviously, being a billionaire is not anywhere near the same level as rape (and I know people will try to misrepresent my argument as such instead of trying to understand the point), but the point is that becoming a billionaire necessitates the mass-scale exploitation of an underclass and thus it's fair game to say that all billionaires, as a whole, are bad for society.

And again, I should reiterate; saying that "billionaires are bad" and saying that "every billionaire is a bad person" are two completely different things.

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

I think her anti-trans views are over stated and she's basically a good person.

Its not at all, if anything, its understated by people like you.

Dark_Arbron posted...

Thats not their choice. What matters is what they choose to do afterward.

If someone inherits a billion, the bulk of that money will be in the form of owning the things that are worth that much, which likely includes rather amoral companies that like to make Africans mine shiny things or destroying cultural heritage for mineral wealth, etc.

Yes in my opinion, but it depends on the quality of services and goods they've created, produce and distribute. Along with the number of people it benefits also.

If I had that much wealth aside from figuring out how to maintain a high income with it invest into businesses and individuals I believe would benefit my community and city.

I'd say yes, but we don't get to see that because we don't interact with them. I don't think it's fair to say an entire group of people doesn't have a single good individual in it, if this were applied to race, this board would explode.

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

It's fine to label all rapists as bad for the sole fact that being a rapist in and of itself requires one to perform the act of rape.

And yet people are accused of it and convicted and later cleared. It's an unfortunate truth that you legit never know. Now, am I going to run around investigating and making sure every rapist is actually a rapist? Hell no. Am I going to judge them based on that, vitriol and hate and all? You're damn right I am. But never ever assume you are always and completely in the right.

It's perfectly fine to have your biases and judgements, but the moment you stop questioning yourself is when you start missing out on a lot in the world.

And also under the way the world works, we all exploit both people and nature en masse. Sure the big wigs at apple benefit from their borderline slave labor hand crafting iProducts, but so does everyone with one glued to their face. It's real easy to point the finger, but it goes both ways in a lot of these situations, because if it didn't they likely wouldn't be billionaires.

froghunter75 posted...

If I inherited a billion dollars tomorrow that same day I'd be seeing what I needed to do to feed and house as many people as I possibly can and leaving like 10 million to myself just to ensure myself and people I love can always be financially secure but even that feels obscene.

That's the difference between billionaires and people like you.
You're a short term thinker that would rather burn cash on those that slip through the cracks, than filling the cracks or broadening the net.

Honest if you wanted to burn $1b for the public good, literally just building one of the 10th largest solar parks would suffice.
You'd be replacing 3 or so coal plants and take credit for the thousands of lives saved over the lifetime of the park.

Bill Gates is trying to cure malaria.
You'd give sammies to bums.

R_Jackal posted...

And yet people are accused of it and convicted and later cleared. It's an unfortunate truth that you legit never know. Now, am I going to run around investigating and making sure every rapist is actually a rapist? Hell no. Am I going to judge them based on that, vitriol and hate and all? You're damn right I am. But never ever assume you are always and completely in the right.

For the purposes of my comparison, I'm talking about people who actually ARE rapists, not just accused of being one. The point of the comparison really wasn't to get into the nuances of "innocent before proven guilty" so you're kind of going off on a tangent.

R_Jackal posted...

And also under the way the world works, we all exploit both people and nature en masse. Sure the big wigs at apple benefit from their borderline slave labor hand crafting iProducts, but so does everyone with one glued to their face. It's real easy to point the finger, but it goes both ways in a lot of these situations, because if it didn't they likely wouldn't be billionaires.

You are comparing apples to oranges. I, as a consumer, don't have a direct say in how my products get produced, and yet many of those products are necessary for me to either survive or interact with the real-world. In other words, I don't really have a choice beyond picking my poison.

The billionaire, on the other hand, is someone who actively chooses exploitation despite having more than enough resources to not have to. That's what makes it bad.

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

The way we look at software now vs 90's is so weird.
The antitrust stuff for bundling IE with Windows...lol times have fucking changed.

So fucking stupid how they brought antitrust on Microsoft for not allowing you to uninstall IE and not any of the asshattery he did with PC-DOS or Xerox

Billionaire, yes. Trillionaire and up, heck no.

Dark_Arbron posted...

If one does theyre not a publicly known figure.

EmilyTheCEman posted...

Is Richard Branson a bad one?

Yes. I looked into his early history after I started to listen to Mike Oldfield. Theres bad blood there and he kinda screwed Mike over

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

You are comparing apples to oranges. I, as a consumer, don't have a direct say in how my products get produced, and yet many of those products are necessary for me to either survive or interact with the real-world. In other words, I don't really have a choice beyond picking my poison.

The billionaire, on the other hand, is someone who actively chooses exploitation despite having more than enough resources to not have to. That's what makes it bad.

You do. Everyone does. Just don't buy the product that causes the suffering and they won't be made.

No one, however--myself included--will. The billionaire -could- help, true, by paying more in to services that improve the workplace and improve general living conditions. We could also help out with that as well. Our entire system incentivizes selfishness though, because it's easier to ignore suffering than do something about it.

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

For the purposes of my comparison, I'm talking about people who actually ARE rapists, not just accused of being one. The point of the comparison really wasn't to get into the nuances of "innocent before proven guilty" so you're kind of going off on a tangent.

Then the argument has no basis in reality and should be disregarded, if you want to make a point learn to make it and don't rely on knee-jerk reactions to prove it or back people off.

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

That's the difference between billionaires and people like you.
You're a short term thinker that would rather burn cash on those that slip through the cracks, than filling the cracks or broadening the net.

Honest if you wanted to burn $1b for the public good, literally just building one of the 10th largest solar parks would suffice.
You'd be replacing 3 or so coal plants and take credit for the thousands of lives saved over the lifetime of the park.

Bill Gates is trying to cure malaria.
You'd give sammies to bums.

I mean it's just an example to illustrate my point, if I were to actually do this I'd make sure it was sustainable or whatever. I'm not just talking about buying a bunch of people a meal and calling it a day. But dude it sounds to me like you've bought into the billionaire propaganda hard. The cracks have never been bigger and the net is basically non existent yet many of these people have gotten richer, so I don't think billionaires actually give a shit about filling cracks or broadening the net as you say. Seems to me like all they care about is amassing as much wealth as possible.

"good" and "exist" are mutually exclusive here

Tell me how someone like Stephen King or JK Rowling are exploitating poor people to make their money. They created an art in their own minds using their own typewriters and didnt force anyone to buy it. Millions of children and adults voluntarily and happily paid a small sum to enjoy their books.

That youve stumbled onto wealth (maybe you just invested in bitcoin early or picked lucky PowerBall numbers) is not an indictment on your character.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Feeney

Although I suppose he's no longer a billionaire.

-Kicksave- posted...

Tell me how someone like Stephen King or JK Rowling are exploitating poor people to make their money. They created an art in their own minds using their own typewriters and didnt force anyone to buy it. Millions of children and adults voluntarily and happily paid a small sum to enjoy their books.

That youve stumbled onto wealth (maybe you just invested in bitcoin early or picked lucky PowerBall numbers) is not an indictment on your character.

Labor was exploited to publish those books. Underpaid illustrators, editors, marketing teams, and let's not forget the factory workers.

Also their movies, which exploit workers in the film industry.

This question is only this black and white if you're a smoothbrain. And I don't care what any of you think about me or my opinion

Blue_Target posted...

I wanna say Bill Gates or the CEO of Patagonia but this board will probably find some dirt on them.

May be on Epstein's flight logs.

ZMythos posted...

Labor was exploited to publish those books. Underpaid illustrators, editors, marketing teams, and let's not forget the factory workers.

Book publishers use printing presses, not a sweatshop. Its not a labor intensive activity. None of the remaining functions are particularly underpaid for what they do. Also, the author doesnt control the operations of a publisher at all, they just sell their idea. Saying a young publisher who makes it big when one of her books happens to make it big is evil is beyond ridiculous. Especially when you dont call a teacher down the road who published her textbook evil, nor any of the hundreds of thousands of less successful authors.

Youre hating the wealth, not the actions of the person.

Finally, with advent of online media, some artists can self publish and make a ton of money.

R_Jackal posted...

You do. Everyone does. Just don't buy the product that causes the suffering and they won't be made.

Virtually every product created under capitalism requires some degree of exploitation to produce it, so what you're asking is literally impossible.

It's intellectually dishonest and lazy to apply equal weight to the person consuming a product as you would to the person who literally dictates how the product gets made, the conditions it's made under and how everyone gets compensated for their work. Just drop this bogus comparison.

R_Jackal posted...

The billionaire -could- help, true, by paying more in to services that improve the workplace and improve general living conditions. We could also help out with that as well.

This is deflection. The social responsibility of someone who's maybe able to buy a new iPhone every couple of years pales in comparison to the social responsibility of someone who could use their wealth to end child hunger overnight and still have enough left over to be one of the richest people on the planet.

I don't know why you're trying to dance around that fact unless you're not arguing in good-faith.

R_Jackal posted...

Then the argument has no basis in reality and should be disregarded

Or maybe you just have really poor reading comprehension. Because, as I already mentioned, false rape accusations have absolutely nothing to do with my point.

NightingaleMD posted...

Wow.

A lot of blind and unjustified hate for people in this topic.

Unsurprising from a liberal echochamber that wants everything handed to them without doing any work.

NMD post.

hockeybub89 posted...

A good person wouldn't have any views even slightly anti-trans

This.

You have to go out of your way to hate trans people like she does. Literally takes more effort to do so.

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Virtually every product created under capitalism requires some degree of exploitation to produce it, so what you're asking is literally impossible.

Consuming fan-made Hentai is the only ethical porn consumption under capitalism.

This was a Cemith fun fact.

-Kicksave- posted...

Also, the author doesnt control the operations of a publisher at all, they just sell their idea.

Let's set the record straight right now: an author who is worth billions of dollars definitely has more say and control over how their books (and any subsequent film/TV show adaptations) get made than you're willing to give credit for.

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

I don't know why you're trying to dance around that fact unless you're not arguing in good-faith.

Says the person who cherry picks portions of what I say to make arguing points. Not worth my time.

R_Jackal posted...

Says the person who cherry picks portions of what I say to make arguing points. Not worth my time.

Says the guy who ignored literally every other point made in my post to address this one throwaway line lol.

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Let's set the record straight right now: an author who is worth billions of dollars definitely has more say and control over how their books (and any subsequent film/TV show adaptations) get made than you're willing to give credit for.

Ok, where is Stephen King exploiting child labor and horrible conditions in publishing his books? Tell him and Im sure hell say something.

Where is Google underpaying its software engineers (lmao with their mid-six figure salaries and 8 digit net worths) that have resulted in the one of the most valuable companies ever?

Being the least bad doesn't automatically translate to being good.

-Kicksave- posted...

Ok, where is Stephen King exploiting child labor and horrible conditions in publishing his books? Tell him and Im sure hell say something.

Where is Google underpaying its software engineers (lmao with their mid-six figure salaries and 8 digit net worths) that have resulted in the one of the most valuable companies ever?

Google has done extreme damage to society through monopoly tactics, invasion of privacy, and the proliferation of the ad based business model online.

Making billions does in fact require underpaying everyone involved with your work along the way, and retaining that amount of money, rather than using it to alleviate suffering across the world is money dragon behavior. That's pretty evil. Even just having it concentrates economic and political power in ways that fundamentally damage equality.

-Kicksave- posted...

Where is Google underpaying its software engineers (lmao with their mid-six figure salaries and 8 digit net worths) that have resulted in the one of the most valuable companies ever?

ITP the only people who work for Google are software engineers.

Lol

Bill Gates since he's doing so much good in humanitary stuff and donating a lot

Whether a billionaire happens to be externally kind and charitable with their money, it's still absolutely bonkers for a single human to accrue so much capital that they can sink countries.