Recherches récentes
Options de recherche
Reminder that there are exactly zero good billionaires.
Zero.
Not one.
Not even that one.
None.
There is no such thing as a good billionaire. The scale of exploitation it takes to become a billionaire is unimaginable. They are, each and every one, monsters.
@jenniferplusplus billionaires should not exist, but for some of them I'm not sure who they're exploiting if anyone. Like who is Taylor Swift exploiting?
I'm arguing but not because I'm trying to prove you wrong. I'm genuinely trying to understand this for myself
@otyugh@pouet.chapril.org@cubeofcheese @jenniferplusplus I don't even know Tailor Swift but let's go with anonymous angel girl Alice. She's born and done all the right things. Then she inerhited billions.
She continued to do all the right things as individual, but she did not use her billions at all (for some reason).
To me she's morally fallen : as long has she has such a fortune she CAN save millions of people on a daily basis decided not spare her billions + the banks prayed on her billion to do bad things. Bad !
@cubeofcheese @jenniferplusplus You know the quote great power imply great responsabilities - it's that. When you've billions (and even millions) society allowed you to be a super human. If super human doesn't use all it's power to at least attempt to save people, then they're a supervillain. If you're one of the few that know how to fly and people falling to their death, and you're not doing a thing, their death are on you.
Alternatively you could give those power to the community instead.
@cubeofcheese @jenniferplusplus To me, a moral billionnaire should feel responsible at each one of the bad news and consider if they could have saved everyone by using up their fortune. Because they may have.
And of course - one doing that wouldn't stay billionaire for long. It may not even by the most efficient use of money (and that's why giving it all to the community make more sense). But on a moral standpoint, it's being evil not to do something when you could have, that's all my piece.
@otyugh @jenniferplusplus I agree that not spending your billions to help people is a moral failing, but that is different from exploiting people to gain your billions. And the original argument is that you can't gain a billion without exploiting someone.
Again though, I agree that billionaires should be spending their money for good
@cubeofcheese >but that is different from exploiting people to gain your billions.
Well. I feel like it's obvious so I won't do a compelling point.
So let's take your example. Taylor Swift. Seem to be some bigshot artist. Okay.
How do bigshot artist gain their money ? The art industry. Is the art industry paying everyone fairly for their work and exploiting no one in the process ?
Does it looks healthy to you ?
Do you feel like most artist get paid their due ? Is it working best like that ?
@cubeofcheese If someone in a hierarchy gain a hundred time more than someone else at the bottom working harder at a similar job, is that morally fine ?
Is it okay that underdogs should eat shit because the unregulated capitalist market doesn't give a shit about art and people and find simpler to give it all to a handful of artists they chose and oversell while most artist starve ?
Is their supposed genius justifying their absurd amount of inequality ? Did we chose it ? I think not :<
@otyugh what you're describing is a moral failing of the industry though, not of the individual. Yes, the individual is a part of that industry and therefore has some responsibility.
But I feel like that's not unique to billionaires. Like if I'm making music and making $80k from it but someone else is only making $60k, am I exploiting them? I don't think so.
I agree that every billionaire has more money than they need and should donate. I'm just not sure that they're all exploiting someone
@cubeofcheese I mean, I think people that have "some responsibility" are the ones who could afford (with sacrifice) to do otherwise. The ones who gain A LOT OF MONEY have "most of the responsibility" because the could do otherwise with almost no sacrifice : they're already rich, they don't need the industry anymore.
That's why I boycott most of "the art industry" artists. To me they're failing at being decent people.
@cubeofcheese >if I'm making music and making $80k from it
I don't think it's the point. The point is not about individuals but the system which makes most artist poor and a few super-rich : it's a systemic failure, not an individual moral failing (even if it'd be nice if the winner of that system could fight it instead of doing victory laps).
@otyugh right. We should not have a system that creates billionaires.
A lot of them are bad people and exploitative. And while it is fair to pressure all of them to donate and work towards fixing the system that created them, I don't know if literally all of them are exploiting people to get there.
It's a nuanced view and probably giving more benefit of the doubt than they deserve, but it is interesting to think about. Thanks for the discussion. 
@cubeofcheese You can be an horrible being without being a slaver : you can collaborate with slavers.
In the end, being in that position, you've more influential power than any rebelling slave who must toil to survive.
When you've got some modicum of power, not doing a thing against an injuste game is partaking in the exploitation.
I feel like no rich person has their hands clean from exploitation. They collaborated and bullshited themselves into justifying the thing that made them winners.
@otyugh hmm I see what you're saying. Being complicit in a system that lifts you up and pushed others down unjustly is not a neutral act