you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -29 points 2 days ago* (25 children)
  • [–] 17 points 2 days ago (6 children)

    If you think a billionaire made their money in a vacuum, with no impact on society, you've been duped.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -15 points 2 days ago (6 children)
  • I can only assume the 105 IQ reference in your username is accurate. Just barely above average, but apparently enough to give you an inflated and misplaced sense of intellectual superiority. It would certainly explain the confidence with which you mistake your own ideological assumptions for economic analysis.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (2 children)

    you think bill gates is the only one that works at microsoft?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)
  • That is false. If Bill Gates was the only one at Microsoft, it would have been limited to a garage sale. The employees are responsible for the modern Microsoft in the same way he is. (FYI, microsoft is evil and a PRISM member)

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 13 points 2 days ago (7 children)

    If the guy getting money for the toy, paid the people actually making the toy what they're worth, there wouldn't be billionaires. Your premise is flawed because you assume billionaires are good people who worked for their gains, when in reality every single billionaire in excistance has abused their workers, at minimum, by not paying them their actual worth.

    Add to that the psychotic greed. When they reached say 500 million, why keep hording more money? They could lower the price of the product to the point of being a non profit, or paying their employees instead of themselves. They would never need more money in their life, but no, they'd rather hoard money, than let their employees live as comfortably as themselves.

    There are no ethical billionaires.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago

    Add to that the psychotic greed. When they reached say 500 million, why keep hording more money?

    Because they have a mental illness, OCD manifesting as a financial hoarding syndrome. They have a compulsion to accumulate more, despite not needing it at all, and despite the fact that their growing fortune may even be damaging society. They would literally kill people, if it meant more money in the bank accounts.

    So imagine what they'll be like when they start converting to Trillionaires? They'll be able to afford their own militaries, especially if they form alliances. Then they can create or conquer their own sovereign nations, and really start fucking things up.

    Billionaires are dangerous enough. We cannot allow Trillionaires to join the "More Money Than Brains Club."

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -13 points 2 days ago* (6 children)
  • [–] 9 points 2 days ago* (1 child)

    Man A is abusing Man B's ignorance of his own worth. Man A is also colluding with his competitors to make sure Man B can't make more anywhere else. Man A is also always, always, ALWAYS, supressing Man B's opportunities to unite with his fellow workers, either by union busting, or by lobbying to destroy the education system that would allow Man B to inform himself of his actual worth.

    But I guess if we only look at billionaires with a 2 dimensional perspective, and ignore all the things they do to make sure their employees couldn't possibly demand more money, then billionaires look like they're just giving people job opportunities...

    But if they paid their employees their worth, they may only have money for the next 20 generations instead of 40....

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -8 points 2 days ago (1 child)
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago*

    See that's where I think you're fundamentally wrong. I think every single person has an intrinsic value, and no person is worth more than anyone else. I don't think it's up to the owner to decide what other people are worth, since his own worth would then be dependant on convincing other people they're worth less.

    I also think you're showing the exact ignorance I'm talking about by arguing what you're arguing. Ignorance isn't about being retarded, or stupid. Every single person is ignorant about something. We can't all know everything. You're showing ignorance by arguing that some people's lives are worth much more than your own, simply because they happen to own more. How many rich people are rich because they managed to create something worthy? And how many rich people are rich because their parents were rich, because THEIR parents were rich? Would you be able to be rich and make a great company if you started life with 500 million from your parents? If you did, would your life and comfort be more important than everyone else's?

    I think you're fundamentally wrong in your assumption that any rich person has any worth, and I think it's fundamentally wrong, that anyone's comfort, life or access to basic necessities is less important than any other person.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (1 child)

    there is no choice if you are threatened with death

    this is why people cant consent if they are coerced and/or threatened

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (1 child)

    Man B HAS to agree to the wage because he will starve if he does not. Man A exploits this fact to underpay him

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

    There is, and there always has been, an unusually high and consistent correlation between the stupidity of a given person and that person’s propensity to be impressed by the measurement of I.Q.

    - Christopher Hitchens

    People who boast about their I.Q. are losers.

    - Stephen Hawking

    IQ is no measure of intelligence, EQ is no measure of emotion either. But craving for IQ and EQ is symptom of a shallow and feeble character.

    - Abhijit Naskar, Rowdy Scientist: Handbook of Humanitarian Science

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago (5 children)
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago (4 children)

    Maybe if you remove the 1 and the 0.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago (3 children)

    Nah, 105 is around average, and people are dumb as fuck.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago* (2 children)

    100 is literally average (median), that's the point of it.

    It's a scale that sets 100 as the middle, and then above average is anything above 100, and below average it's anything below 100

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (1 child)

    H1B 🥁🥁🥁🥁🥁🥁

    there it is

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 0 points 1 day ago (1 child)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)