• hakunawazo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      I don’t support violence at all. But for every mentioned woodchipper, this scene from Tucker & Dale vs Evil is mandatory:

  • spittingimage@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    I think they’re bad for the economy. Money has to circulate. Every time a billionaire throws another million on the pile, they make things worse for everyone else.

    • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      This is a view we don’t see often enough. Everybody is into hating billionaires the way teenage girls hate the super-hot cheerleader. All they do is complain that it’s not “fair” for somebody to be so rich. There’s not enough discussion of the purely mechanical reasons extreme wealth is bad for the economy, not to mention the corruption opportunities it creates. The ultra-rich don’t spend their money, they just exchange it to trade big blocks of asset ownership back and forth. None of that money ever gets spent on a loaf of bread or a bus ticket, or a GI Joe with the kung fu grip. It essentially disappears from the economy. I don’t think most people even comprehend how that works - it involves more thought than reacting to memes.

  • Apollo42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    6 days ago

    Ideally they’d be taxed into no longer being billionaires.

    Realistically we probably need to violently remind them who holds the actual power before this becomes a reality.

  • zephorah@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 days ago

    They are subsidized by our government. Truly. The broken system created Elon Musk and now the broken system allowed him to buy a presidency for $134 million. Cheap, for him.

    How? That is how much the system has devalued American labor since 1981.

  • frezik@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    7 days ago

    If you invest in the sp500, you’ll have something around 8% return per year. This is highly variable year by year, of course, but in the long run, that’s what you can expect to average out. You can do better than the sp500, but generally not without accepting higher risk.

    With those returns, you will double your money every 9 years. Roughly. It’s going to vary by decade. 2000-2010 was flat, while 2010-2020 was unusually good.

    If you max out a 401k, HSA, and IRA on this strategy from a young age, you should have millions for retirement. If you’re a millennial or younger, you’re going to need a million or two (at least) to have a reasonable retirement.

    How do you turn that into a billion? Doubling every 9 years won’t do it in your lifetime. Not unless you started life as a millionaire and never withdrew a dime until you were 90. Starting with $1000 and doubling every year for 20 years, consistently, would do it.

    How do you double your money consistently for 20 years? Either extreme luck or doing something extremely shady. Probably both.

    In other words, they are not the genius captains of industry that right-libertarians want you to believe. They got lucky or are deeply unethical or both, and they do not deserve your respect. Most likely, they deserve your disdain. Every one of them.

  • Harvey656@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 days ago

    What a funny thing to ask on Lemmy.

    I prefer mine well done, and grilled to perfection personally.

  • AmosBurton_ThatGuy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    7 days ago

    Asking this question on lemmy is like going to a Linux comm and asking if it’s a good idea to switch from windows to Linux. You’re preaching (asking?) to the choir.

    That said, eat the fucking rich.