Fixed it for ya
Fixed it for ya
cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/12580687
83 comments
-
Billionaires want all the money, fuck everyone else.
This seems very naive to me. In my experience, everyone wants all the money, fuck everyone else. Including my fellow working class. All of them. Every single one.
Siding with billionaires
I see no sides. I see no difference in kind between billionaires, my boss, my co-workers, my neighbours, homeless people, members of the local labour club, you, me or anyone. We're all human beings and we all prioritise our own wellbeing over the wellbeing of others. Cooperation in society and ruthless greed are not mutually exclusive. Humans will cooperate when it's beneficial and also stab their fellow humans in the back, step on them and exploit them when it's beneficial.
you want to be fucked over by someone who has no care for you
That's ridiculous, nobody wants that.
Thereโs no allegiance to a class itโs just something that is
If is there is no allegiance then there can be no traitor.
-
You are quite wrong. Most want enough money to be content in life. Billionaires want to sit on their dragon hoard of wealth, while shafting those on the bottom line. If you see no sides then you are very ignorant. And no difference between the homeless and billionaires. Yeah fucking right. Billionaires get to just buy companies because they can, spend shit loads on lobbying for things they want. All while homeless people are fucked in a hundred ways. Its disgusting how many anti-homeless measures are being made. Just another reason hoarding wealth fucks everyone over. Humans also rape, lie, steal, murder, etcโฆ we work hard to jail and rehabilitate these people. So maybe we need to do it to the extremely wealth. Nobody wants to be fucked over, obviously. But that is what is happening. Again ignorance is bliss. Generations donโt exist, we just use it to generalize age groups. Classes donโt exist, yet we use them to describe wealth groups. Genders donโt exist, yet we use them to describe people. In every single case you can still be a traitor to something that groups you. I can be trans and say that all trans people (except me) are not valid, that would make me a traitor and a TERF. There are not always allegiances to ideas meant to group people. If you are not in the extremely wealthy class, then defending them is betraying what you are.
-
Billionaires want to sit on their dragon hoard of wealth
Having wealth and hoarding wealth aren't the same thing. Hoarding implies isolation and withheld access. Someone keeping money under their mattress is hoarding that money. Someone who is investing in businesses in active operation within the economy is doing the exact opposite of hoarding.
Stop misusing this term.
-
Thereโs only a few ways to become a billionaire. Get money, get more money, and get even more money. Also be born into a family with lots of money. Just because some of that money is in assets, bonds, stocks, and such doesnโt mean that they donโt hoard the wealth. Investing in businesses only makes the stock holders richer it doesnโt trickle down. You donโt have to just shove it into a bank. The extremely wealthy donโt hoard money in a big pile, they just want to see their net worth go up. So Iโm not misusing the term hoarding, you just seem to not understand how the economy works.
-
Thereโs only a few ways to become a billionaire. Get money, get more money, and get even more money.
Typically by creating something extremely popular, which in turn becomes valued at much more than it cost you to create it.
Minecraft, for example, made its creator $2 billion when he sold it to Microsoft.
Also be born into a family with lots of money.
Not really; statistically, 70% of generational wealth is gone by the second generation, 90% by the third. Inheritors, generally speaking, spend what they inherit, they don't hold onto it for the next generation to inherit it again. Again, opposite of hoarding.
Just because some of that money is in assets, bonds, stocks, and such doesnโt mean that they donโt hoard the wealth.
Yes, it does. The only way to hoard money is to not spend it. No billionaire has a Scrooge McDuck vault full of cash. Billionaires don't hoard--ironically, hoarding money will only ever decrease your net worth, unless your currency is in deflation, in which case you've got bigger problems.
Investing in businesses only makes the stock holders richer it doesnโt trickle down.
You're acting like businesses exist in some separate reality from the rest of the population. The businesses profit by offering goods and services that the market wants. That is what makes the share price go up, and in turn makes stock holders wealthier. Buying shares all by itself doesn't do shit.
'Stockholders get wealthier when the business is having a positive impact on the economy by giving the market something it wants' isn't exactly the argument you think it is.
they just want to see their net worth go up.
And spending (already-taxed) money to buy stuff that then proceeds to become more valuable, is not an act that deprives anyone else's wallet of a single penny.
-
You really donโt understand what I was saying do you. This is boring, Iโm tired of listening to an echo chamber of shit ideas.
-
Iโm tired of listening to an echo chamber of shit ideas.
hangs out in Lefty Memes
lol
-
-
-
-
-
You are quite wrong.
I disagree.
Most want enough money to be content in life. Billionaires want to sit on their dragon hoard of wealth, while shafting those on the bottom line.
All, including billionaires, want to ensure the survival of their genes. Wealth is sexually attractive. At no point does more wealth stop being attractive. So everyone wants as much money as they can get. That doesn't mean they're necessarily prepared to do what's required to get it (murder, exploitation, etc.) but they want the money.
And no difference between the homeless and billionaires. Yeah fucking right.
I didn't say no difference, I said no difference in kind.
Nobody wants to be fucked over, obviously. But that is what is happening.
Indeed.
In every single case you can still be a traitor to something that groups you.
I disagree.
If you are not in the extremely wealthy class, then defending them is betraying what you are.
That's ridiculous. If a person defends the extremely wealthy honestly then that isn't betraying what they are, that is what they are.
-
Iโm tired of your ignorance, maybe try reading a book or using critical thinking. Otherwise youโll just stay a sad, ignorant person sucking billionaire dick and getting nothing in return but bing fucked over.
-
ROFL
-
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.
-
-
Itโs a quote from a book. Like I said maybe you should read some books.
-
Itโs a quote from a book.
I see you're really an expert at that there critical thinking and never jump to conclusions.
-
Responds with a gif, wantโs critical thinking. Not to mention a gif that could be interpreted several ways. Maybe use words to avoid ambiguity.
-
wantโs critical thinking
LOL I don't want anything from you.
a gif that could be interpreted several ways
For a critical thinker, dealing with a stimulus that is open to interpretation should be no problem.
Maybe use words to avoid ambiguity.
Maybe apply critical thinking in your life. Every day. Every moment. Rather than just talking about it.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
A class traitor is someone who acts counter to their class-interests. No allegiance required.
That's ridiculous, nobody wants that.
Yet you defend a system which fucks you and the rest of the working class over.
-
someone who acts counter to their class-interests
So not actually a traitor then, I see.
you defend
I've simply pointed out the reality of the situation, I haven't stated any judgement about it.
-
So not actually a traitor then, I see.
Linguistics prescriptivism is bullshit.
I've simply pointed out the reality of the siuation
(x) doubt.
Nice to see your bets so hedged. /s
But even if you were correct: Shouldn't we as a society remove the system which enables people to monopolize power, if it's "human nature" to exploit others?
-
Linguistics prescriptivism
I don't know what that means.
Shouldn't we as a society remove the system which enables people to monopolize power, if it's "human nature" to exploit others?
The moral judgement is irrelevant here. It makes no difference. "We" cannot stop human beings from gaining power over others so the question is moot. Your assumptions are unfounded.
-
I don't know what that means.
The moral judgement is irrelevant here.
I've not made any moral judgement. I've extrapolated your view of the world and said that I don't want that.
"We" cannot stop human beings from gaining power over others so the question is moot.
That's simply wrong. There's a ton of historical and anthropological evidence of societal structures that prevent monopolisation of power. Notice that there are way less kings around than a few hundred years ago?
Your assumptions are unfounded.
I'm claiming the same things of yours.
-
means claiming that someone "uses a word wrong"
I haven't done that. I've pointed out that OP's use of the word "traitor" in their phrase "class traitor" has a different meaning to the ordinary use of the word "traitor". I haven't said their use is wrong.
monopolisation of power
We're talking at cross purposes. You're talking about "monopolisation" of power but I'm talking about gaining power over others. I don't know what you mean by "monopolisation" of power. (And I don't care because whatever you mean, it's clear that it isn't important.)
There's a ton of historical and anthropological evidence of societal structures that prevent monopolisation of power.
But not prevent the acquisition of power over others, or prevent exploitation.
Notice that there are way less kings around than a few hundred years ago?
No? Only in name. I find it odd when people talk about feudalism in the past tense. To me it seems like feudalism never ended.
-
I haven't done that
Yes, you have
gaining power over others
That's what monopolisation of power means.
But not prevent the acquisition of power over others, or prevent exploitation.
Yes, exactly that. That's what democracy's supposed to handle.
To me it seems like feudalism never ended.
There are distinct differences of capitalism and feudalism.
-
Yes, you have
I disagree.
Yes, exactly that.
LOL so you believe there is "a ton of historical and anthropological evidence of societal structures that prevent" people gaining power over others? You believe there have been "a ton" of human societies with no exploitation? You have no idea what you're talking about.
That's what democracy's supposed to handle.
LOL
There are distinct differences of capitalism and feudalism.
Oh I see! Distinct differences! LOL
-
I disagree.
Well, you're wrong.
You believe there have been "a ton" of human societies with no exploitation? You have no idea what you're talking about.
There have been a ton of societies which limited the amount of power individuals could amass.
Oh I see! Distinct differences! LOL
Yeah. Feudal property relations are totally the same as capitalistic property relations. No difference whatsoever. Pretty much everyone is still a subsistence farmer. /s
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
You're just telling on yourself.
-
83 comments