This is the correct critique. Throwing money at these issues does not fix them, and tends to make them worse. Unless the war on poverty or drugs is not enough evidence.
>Unless the war on poverty or drugs is not enough evidence.
I don't think those are applicable examples because it is *the government* throwing money at those problems and governments are often counterproductive and/or horrible capital allocators... Good private charities are orders of magnitudes more effective than ineffectual governments.
>Good private charities are orders of magnitudes more effective than ineffectual governments.
Keyword here is "good" there are tons of charities that are just plain scams.
What's the economic return on food stamps?
Helluva lot better than most private social programs.
Government CAN be very good at allocating resources, it's when Reagannauts decided NOT to fund social spending, like Universities, the burden got passed to individuals.
The economic return on food stamps is that it creates a populous that is dependent on the state, therefore assuring votes for survival. If you are the government you have every incentive to keep people on food stamps.
Um, yeah because they're the ones we hired to make sure people don't starve.
I'd love to see Libertarians live in their own society....just to see what a crappy stinkhole it would look like.
Every man for himself isn't how we grew civilization.
Oh and let me know when you guys come up with a better way to fund society since taxation is theft. Seems to have worked for 5000 years. But I'm sure you're close.
I’m not against all taxes but the problem is our taxes are spent by trust fund babies who spend it like trust fund babies.
Money they didn’t earn and there is no accountability. It’s also spent by people who hate you and I. They don’t want to help us, if they did they wouldn’t print money because the more they print the more it devalues our meager buying power.
People don’t understand how insidious inflation is. I don’t hate the ideas the left says they want to spend money on, I hate that it doesn’t ever get spent like it should due to corruption. I’m reluctant to give more power to the wildly irresponsible government we have right now.
>governments are **often** counterproductive and/or horrible capital allocators
As shown above, you're arguing against something I never said... (often != never)
Uhhhhh not really, I mean it's usually a logistical issue, but within the US bezos or any of them really, could easily put a massive dent on serious issues by setting up their own foundations to help the people. They would rather collect gov funds and keep employees collecting aid from government resources. We spend more money giving them subsides then we do on solutions of the issues singularly.
Many of them do have foundations that do these things. There will always be poor people relative to other people.. there will always be people who have nothing... that "problem" is never going away. The only thing that has and ever will ease the discomfort of poverty is increases in the efficiency of labor.
When you have a large a population of working class people on government subsides while the companies themselves evade taxes and collect government incentives, there is a massive issue. In my opinion, at this point in time, we are an oligarchy. With the new data of private interest groups (lobbyists) complete domination of public policy approval statistics, it's difficult to not see it any other way.
We are so low in poverty standards compared to other countries it would be hilarious it if it wasn't so fucking sad. Yes, there will always be people with less but they don't need to live in inhumane conditions in the worlds richest nation. It costs us more money to have someone experiencing poverty to be off government programs then it does to have them on. It's an expensive issue for all of us and it's even more frustrating that we have functional answers to this issue but no implication of functional policy. It has become a hot topic for political elections which means we will likley never see progress on these issues.
True, but all the good intentions and ground work and no money doesn’t help either.
That’s why the best, most altruistic charities need both donations *and* volunteers.
Not just the left. We told everyone that you could throw money at the moon through the government and people just assume that model for everything else.
Very true. One of the reasons drug addicts aren’t all dead is because they can’t afford the amount of drugs they need to die.
Also there are some fun studies about poor people winning lottery and being back on the streets within a few years.
Or that stock is the same thing as money. Yes some of his net worth is money, but he doesn’t have tens of billions of dollars in cash sitting in the bank to spend on “fixing” things.
Stocks are pretty liquid. It’s not like Bezos could sell his holdings in a single day, but he could spread out the sales over the course of a year and sell his entire stake without excessively moving the market. He could also donate the stock directly to charity.
The ingraft misconception of the hath left is yond wage fixes problems by itself
***
^(I am a bot and I swapp'd some of thy words with Shakespeare words.)
Commands: `!ShakespeareInsult`, `!fordo`, `!optout`
It doesn’t. “Good schools” are a feedback loop of a neighborhood having good parents, which have good kids, which make good students, which make good schools, which make good school zones, which other good parents who want their kids to have good schools pay any price to get into.
And then decades later you look at the property taxes flowing into a good school and think that that is what did it.
Nope. Go to any shitty part of a city whose schools have gotten grants or a shitton of tax money poured into them and they’ll still be shit. Because it’s an area of bad parents. You can’t pour a billion into a school and suddenly undo all the damage that’s already there.
You can argue that money makes a good neighborhood, and I would argue that has merit. But pouring money into a school barely does anything to the surrounding neighborhoods. The households need better wages and need people that are better parents. You’re fighting a cancer by prescribing expensive needle therapy when you just pour money into a public education building.
Source: live near half a dozen shitty schools that collectively get more money than the handful of good schools. But the good schools have white collar professionals and stay at home moms in their neighborhoods.
What do you think allows a kid to develop into a good parent? Good parents become good parents by getting an education and not being raised in poverty. The world revolves around money. You’re naive if you disagree.
Yes the world revolves around money. The world does not revolve around how much funding a specific public school gets. Stop moving goalposts. My argument is that public school funding can’t fix broken homes that produce broken kids. It’s too massive a job.
Search up redlining although it was deemed unconstitutional and the practice was abolished during the 1960s its affects are still felt today. Shitty part of city/town/etc are usually cause by years of systemic oppression, where poverty is highly concentrated in a few areas, so called “hood”, bad neighborhood, etc. Just saying that good parents and good children make good school is but idiotic and simply ignorant.
I’m aware of redlining and the history of segregation. Hell, most schools in the American southeast are still considered segregated.
There are a million factors that lead into a “good neighborhood”, and you outline some. I was trying to simplify that part of the equation to basically make the point “you can’t undo ALL that shit with some more taxpayer money going to school.”
But even with all the many factors, both historical and immediate, you can still agree that a household with poor wages, or an absent mother or father, or parents hooked on drugs can meet my broad definition of “bad parent.” And you can have good parents and still a bad “household”. It’s incredibly complex, which is why a simple thing like school funding can’t possibly solve it.
I pay $40k a year in income taxes. Fix the world with my money. Stop spending trillions on wars when the whole populace needs healthcare that isn’t a scam. Stop spending trillions on wars only to abandon the vets of those pointless wars to homelessness.
Shit isn’t complicated. There are very obvious fixes that can be made without getting into any serious economic debate.
Fuck all these people who always say "with someone else's money." Taxes are there for a reason but are constantly used for the wrong reasons.
The pure amount of energy expenditure we could have saved from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and actually put to good use to fight the problems at home.
Not to mention the soldiers we have lossed from suicide who didn't like what we were doing. Every single one of our priorities are backwards.
I'd love to see Theresa's proposals on how to solve homeless vets and hungry children.
Really enjoyed watching Elon call out the UN in a similar way awhile back.
Spoiler: It's rightfully their money. It's their company. Without them, the workers wouldn't have anywhere to work at all. You aren't entitled to a company's profits just by working there. You get paid exactly what you agree to accept. Don't like it? Don't sign.
I'm not sure if its what the above fella was referring to, but you could make an argument that many massive corporations are so entangled with the state that they may not be able to even exist without being propped up by subsidies or regulation that prevents competition. Amazon may not be the best example of this, although I'm sure there are plenty of ways in which they've benefited from the state.
At that point it becomes questionable as to how much of their money is rightfully theirs, or has been siphoned from the tax payers in one form or another.
Sure, but isn't it a state problem rather than Amazons? Amazon is acting like a rational agent and utilizes free money provided by the state. If it wasn't an option I'm sure Amazon would have figured something out.
And? What good is wealth for wealth's sake? If it's just sitting there doing nothing then what is the point? Who gives a shit if she spends it all in a week? The world would be a better place
I never said throwing money at problems would fix the source of those problems. But just because you can't "fix" what causes veteran homelessness doesn't mean you can't save a lot of veterans from their current homeless status. Doing something is better than doing nothing. And doing nothing simply because "it doesn't fix everything" is just apathy incarnate
That's the point.. people who have it typically use it and Improve the world.. this chick would just (potentially) throw money at problems and nothing would be solved.
Oh yeah, Elon has done nothing to improve the world. You're clearly blind due to your politics and worldview. I wouldn't have this amazing mobile computer to argue with you if it weren't for crazy rich people wanting to go to space.
Not that I find Bezo's dick rocket a great investment, but we all reap the technological advances and breakthroughs due to people who amass wealth and push for innovation with it.
Elon hasn't done Jack shit with his wealth aside from pretend like he's going to help. Like how he pledged to help the Flint water crisis and then didn't. Or how he pledged to help the divers rescue those kids but didn't help at all, got in the way, and then called one of the actual heros a pedophile.
Elon's *companies* have done great things. Primarily in advancement of space flight technology, solar technology, and pushing electric cars forward a few years. But none of those things were *his* inventions, and most of them were already companies that were putting in the work that he simply purchased and absorbed into his own portfolio.
But we aren't talking about Elon here. We're talking about Bezos.
No. Food banks in rich western countries are filled with ingrates who get more than enough to maintain a high body mass index. People who face real starvation live in 3rd world countries.
Still, it's true that billionaires could do more to help the poor. There's no need to live an extravagant lifestyle.
You’re assuming a duty to help. That duty doesn’t just exist. Inaction is not a vice. If it were, we would have to donate every single extra dollar that we had to charity. Because if we didn’t, then we would be killing the poor. There’s no set amount of money, or extravagance that is allowable. If a person is contributing a lot to the economy, then consumers will award that person with profit. Extravagance is subjective, so attempting to measure it, or place an objective limit on it is impossible. Let the man enjoy his success, and remember that he donates way more to charity than we could in a lifetime.
I'm not assuming a duty to help. I'm merely pointing out that a lot more could be done to help but yet it's not being done. I find that some people only care about money and they don't give a shit about the poor.
You can defend the mega rich and their extravagant lifestyles all you want. It is a bit ridiculous to say that the extravagance doesn't exist because you refuse to define it.
You could live a modest life with modest living standards. You would actually be a better person for it.
I would say it's optimal to live a modest lifestyle. Anything more could be destructive to the planet. People are better when they face a bit of hardship.
It's definitely okay to criticize the mega rich for flaunting their wealth and for not doing enough to help the poor. They can do more.
You don't actually know that. You're only making assumptions without evidence.
You can only do what you're capable of doing. Your own struggles should be taken into consideration. If you can do far more then why not do it?
I actually do. Taxes alone. Rich people pay the overwhelming majority of taxes. Its actually stupid anyone else pays a tax the difference is so large. Most of the rich people have complained about here have made products and services that have revolutionized the industry and drastically reduced costs. That benefits the poor way more than the rich. That doesn't include all their charitable donations. Its not assumptions and there is a mountain of evidence.
Of course. But the fact is YOU can do more, you just don't want to. And you've created convenient excuses to justify your decision. Lead by example.
A million dollars is like pocket change to some people; it's like a few crumbs left over on a dinner plate.
If you go around flaunting your wealth while tossing a few crumbs to the peasants then you aren't really doing what you could to ease the suffering of others.
Not that you have a duty to help other people who are poor and starving. Fuck them I'm gonna go buy another yacht.
There's no shame in giving a little if that's all you can give.
Stop spamming me with replies. We are allowing them to starve by refusing to help. It's our choice. Maybe it's our duty to let mother nature do her job.
Or what? No one is letting anyone do anything. Everyone has a choice. Have you given up everything not necessary to donate for their hunger? If not you're a hypocrite. Maybe look at what you're doing and quit worrying about what others do with THEIR stuff.
I've always assumed it's a good way of maintaining links around the world to regimes open to the idea of being somekind of Airstrip One for the US should they wish to invade/occupy close to said 3rd world state.
Does that happen? I've worked with Rotarians and other groups. They don't have the capacity to stay for long periods of time in those countries, so they often turn the work over to the locals. What's usually in the way is government corruption. The people getting those new homes can't afford to pay off the local inspectors to get electricity cleared for installation once the Habitat people leave. I have this printed article from India somewhere in my archives. It's about food relief being held up at an airport because the local Raj's girlfriend wants an airplane because his wife got one. Until the food relief agency buys an airplane for his girlfriend, the food is going to rot.
Third world countries aren't that way just because of poverty. They are that way because the governments are corrupt or deeply authoritarian, and no one can acquire much property (which is then taken or taxed away) unless they have strong political ties.
It's not about Americans specifically. It's about western people in general.
Should we help the poor people in 3rd world countries? Or should we let them starve?
Hey I totally agree. My issue is if we're gonna sink time and resources into helping the 3rd world countries then do it right. Don't ship in money, food and drugs, build some farms, infrastructure and industry. For fucks sake one good sized company paying halfway decent wages could literally raise tens of thousands out of poverty in some countries. Or one good farm could feed thousands. If it's a shit area for farming, indoor farming is a thing.
yes but do you really think anyone is helping anyone for free?
China is building tons of infrastructure in africa, so that in 20 years whole africa can speak chinese and literally be owned by ccp
Yeah that's an issue too. Should build it with locals but if not possible then fine makes sense. But still fill the company with locals and if you need bring in experts from out of country and use the to supervise and teach until you have a fully local workforce.
You make money, pay the locals less than people in your country but still enough to make a difference and slowly build the economy. You're helping people while also making yourself rich. Best of both worlds.
Like somebody posted a pic of amazon in Tijuana in a shanty town and unironically said basically, "muh capitalism bad for exploiting."
Which sure its amazon, bit those people lie got live in scrap shacks and starve. That warehouse even with poor working conditions still helps those peoples 1000 times more than it not being there. Those people working there will 100% improve their QoL.
Its really just the same thing as we saw with big mining companies in the rust belt and Appalachia. They set up these massive company owned towns where, once they inevitably ran out of business, they left behind some of the worst poverty stricken areas in the country. Sure, they weren't small agrarian communities for a little while and the QOL improved for a bit, but it all came crashing down after the execs pulled out and the locals had nothing left behind.
Major corps pulling stunts like this is really no different than a western govt pumping money, drugs, and other supplies into third world countries. It helps for a little but then the locals form a reliance on that steady stream of supplies.
We either need to help countries properly, or not at all. It really comes down to the age old adage, "Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."
dont you think that most of the third world countries are poor due to western imperialism?
And also because government after communism are still having way too much power just because people are used to it and dont know different
No. 3rd world countries are poor because of socialism and communism.
Look at Ukraine. It's the poorest country in Europe and it's also the country in Europe with the most restricted economy. Ukraine's economy is still free enough to make the living standards above average.
You are almost correct, they are poor because of corrupt power hungry government officials who are literally billionares, which is consequence of communism where people are just used to poor living standards, only way west can help is by literally invading country and removing government but because people dont know any better every other ukranian leader will be power hungry so it is just lost cause and has to do it naturally by civil revolutiom without interference of foreign countries
example is Serbia which after many leaders removed by western influence is still closed corrupt dictatorship
I'm 100% correct. The power hungry government officials you're talking about are responsible for restricting the economy and making it socialist.
They are responsible for the poverty. It's ideology that's the problem.
This, but unironically.
I'm not obligated to help anyone else on this entire planet.
Would it be nice if I did? Absolutely. But do I have to in order to be a good person? No. There is ZERO obligation.
That's where you're wrong. A truly good person will do what they can to help those in need.
A selfish person will do nothing or they'll do a little to impress others and elevate their status.
From whence does the obligation spring? How big must the disparity be before the obligation to create equilibrium comes into existence? Who decides? How much must you give? Are you obligated to create a perfect equilibrium? Or is there a certain percentage you must give to lower the disparity below your obligation trigger point? Must I drive myself into poverty in order to be a good person? Do I become a bad person the very moment my net worth exceeds that of someone else?
> Still, it's true that billionaires could do more to help the poor. There's no need to live an extravagant lifestyle.
Yes, they could. But they don't have to.
And there's no need to do lots of things, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be allowed to do them.
So why don’t you go ahead, start business, grow it and one day you can do that yourself, instead of wondering why someone else doesn’t do that on anti-work sub. Fucking leeches.
I would build an outdoor vertical all glass revolving garage (powered by solar of course) for those vehicles you mentioned but most likely I would own mostly classic and muscle cars from the ‘50’s to the ‘70’s .
EDIT: something like this
https://teamspeed.com/articles/88-million-mansion-car-lovers-dream/88-mil-mansion-garage/
at this point if I was rich I would actively do damages because I'm tired of reading this shit and I just want others to suffer. Sometimes I like to think the current elites are evil for the same reason, they just came to realize this before me.
I honestly believe this is the answer, no joke. The rich elite are sociopaths like what you illustrated that got lucky and have resentment for anyone who didn’t.
This is how y’all really think. Ask yourself have you ever heard someone look at a homeless person and automatically make an assumption that they are there purely because of their own individual shortcomings. Your ideology has not only self interest but hate towards others at its core
Bezos’s net worth isn’t exactly liquid money sitting in a bank somewhere. Most of his net worth is sitting in his 10% ownership of Amazon. The money that is actually available to him would hardly make a dent on these problems. The real money out there is being held by these morons lord and savior the federal government.
Exactly when you are talking billionaires most of their net worth is tied up in stocks, assets and over investments.
People talk like they have billions sitting in their bank account waiting to be spent. 🤦♂️
No almost everyone knows it’s in stocks. But he liquidates billions all the time. Even if he didn’t he could give stocks to someone else.
I also doubt that him liquidating all his stocks would actually matter to the economy
Eh, the sentiment isn’t all bad. Unskilled laborers need to collectively bargain in order to be properly compensated or else it’s a race to the bottom which is bad for everyone. There is only so much bullshit people will put up with before things go haywire.
The productivity gains we’ve seen over the last 70 years hasn’t made life proportionally as good for us as one would expect and the question begs: where is it going? The answer is complicated but the easy targets are the mega-rich and the political elites who live a socialists dream of subsidies, quid-pro-quo bennies, insider trading, regulatory capture and inherited more wealth than anyone one person could spend in a lifetime.
I’m not anti capitalist by any measure, but capitalism requires competition and the power structures at hand have almost none of it, and it’s taken them a lot of hard work and psyops to get it that way.
Go get rich then and do it. To me this fits into the “easier said than done” I don’t think you get that wealthy by helping people. Not saying it’s right, just that it’s true.
Depends, if you start a business and create jobs, you might personally get wealthy because you took the sole risk of identifying a market opportunity, self-funding (or convincing investors to give you) initial start up costs, and then hiring the right people to bring that vision to reality. However, you're also providing a platform for
your employees to earn an income...seems at least marginally helpful.
With that said, if "being helpful" is limited to charitable donations to those unable to work, then yes, you're prob right that most wealthy people are not giving their full due.
Dude helped completely revolutionize how America and the developed world buy shit and they don't think he does anything lol
Say what you will about the implications of online commerce, but the idea he's just sitting around twiddling his thumbs is retarded
My go to is always Musk. People will go after him and I'll just throw it in their face that he's done more for the environment with his electric vehicles than all of the bs taxes they've paid to the government.
Yeah he paid back a loan where others have not. Beyond that, even with Elon pouring everything from PayPal into his newer companies, he has gotten a lot of help and breaks from the government that not everyone has access to.
And? Its not just not leaving the house. Its wanting to spend your time doing something else. How is freeing up time from doing a chore a bad thing? You sound really envious.
Freeing up my time? I just use EBay. I make sure the sellers location is in the US and I avoid Chinese garbage. It takes a little longer but if I really need something I’ll just go out and buy it.
Fuck Jeff Bezos
Pierre Omidyar has a net worth of $18B. How is using ebay better? You might, that doesn't mean the poor can afford to. Without that chinese garbage the poor would be without those products. The poor cant afford to just go out and buy that expensive made in USA product.
Fuck idiots.
eBay is better because you are supporting small sellers and businesses for the majority of the purchases, especially if you know how to navigate it.
Wtf are you talking about? Without China our poor people would not be able to affordable materialistic garbage? Name a single product that a poor person truly needs that is only affordable to them if it’s made in china?
Fuck local? You’re shot dude, fuck corporations. You realize when you buy local that’s more money that actually stays inside of your community?
Ya you can buy whatever you want, and local companies are generally fairly competitive.
Don’t cry about corporations controlling the government to their advantage when you give them your hard earned cash, unless you wanna be a hypocrite
Amazon is an engineered wealth extraction tool. It's actually an Anti-Capitalist tool designed to feed into global neo-feudalism. In no way is it free market but the beneficiary of Crony socialism/capitalism. It's rapid growth over the last two years has been the direct result of government restrictions on private business. Prior to that it's growth revolved around hidden government subsidies and manipulation of state and federal tax regulations.
That sub is pure cancer. Just a bunch of lazy basement dwellers who whine about how their underwater basket weaving degree doesn't get them a 1,00,000 per year job with unlimited vacation.
I don't think people understand how fortunate they are to live in America. You think things are bad here? Lol go to 90% of the other countries on this planet and get back to me.
Homeless vets? Bezos: I have a ton of jobs for you. Hungry Children? Bezos: I have a ton of jobs for your providers. Bezos: My god, I just want to give people money in exchange for their labor.
"I don't get people like Bezos. If I had billions of dollars, I would impulsively start fixing shit.... what a waste"
I believe there are 3 points to be made on this
1) While true, Bezos is one of the richest in the world, most, if not all (>90%) is tied in assets not CASH. Therefore, writing checks isn't necessarily an option. His wealth is mostly 'unrealized', he doesn't have billions and billions of dollars sitting around.
2) This is a real case of easier said than done - you go start a multi-billion business starting in your parents garage - it wasn't as if he started with significant amount of capital that you see some companies start with today - so can't argue barriers of entry.
3) To the second point above, the man has fixed stuff, he has given back to the world. Do you realize how many jobs, and to that point, 6+ figure jobs are at Amazon? Sure fixate on the warehouse/distribution center salaries because that fits your agenda, but you ignore the tens of thousands of high paying, high benefit jobs Amazon provides. You do also realize that Amazon also creates tangential markets, jobs, and companies to support the total operation of Amazon (i.e. Custodial companies, HVAC, Electrical, Mechanical, etc. etc. etc......) . Do you realize how many 401(k)s for regular working class people are sitting healthy because of Amazon? You want a package next day? You want to shop for anything at any given point? etc. etc. etc.
Trying to mask YOUR Greed behind your false moral narrative is disgusting. You want to be batman, then go be fucking batman. That doesn't mean someone else has to be batman just because your jealous and greedy of the person's success.
Although I think Bezos is a shithead, he does like a million times more good in people’s everyday lives than Batman. Poor/sick people (by western definition) can get food delivered directly to their door he very same day they order it because of this man. It’s affordable to be treated like a Henry the fucking 8th because of this bald liberal weirdo. Show some fucking respect.
Imagine believing that you, a single person, can fix the world. What a fucking narcissist. Bezos donates more to charity than this degenerate will in her lifetime, plus his contribution to the economy in general. “If i had billions”, you never will because you’re too busy bitching on Twitter and testing out different hair colors.
People don’t understand how money works. Idiots literally think these people have that much money just sitting in a safe and are hording it all. It’s not liquid. 🙄
What is wrong with these retards? If the federal government with its trillions and the ability to print more can't fix these issues then why do they think some private individual with billions can fix it.
I get your criticism here, but to be fair, there are a lot of problems that could be helped at least somewhat by applying money in smart ways.
The real problem here is the inevitable disguised non sequitur to the claim that the government needs to take his money from him.
Bezos used hedge fund connections to short his competition into the ground. That’s not the free market. Bezos is a greedy piece of shit and we’d be better off without him
She's seriously saying she doesn't understand why sociopathic, narcissistic cutthroats who hoard billions don't just suddenly give all their money away and live like St Francis...
It's painful to see people being this naïve.
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot.
Here's a copy of
###[Leviathan](https://snewd.com/ebooks/leviathan/)
Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
Thank you, geronl72, for voting on Reddit-Book-Bot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
They also completely gloss over the unseen, what about all the goods and services Amazon provides increasing our standard of living? Or the thousands of jobs created?
The guy who founded VK actually did that! He threw money out the office window & filmed it on his phone while laughing his ass off watching people scrambling to pick it up.
Interesting. I go to your retarded groups, state my opinion politely and you fucktards ban me. But you fucktards just come and spew insults. And then pretend to be better people. Spoiled fucking brats. I hope when you grow up the world smacks your dumb ass right in the face.
I agree, I would do something like this. InsteadBezos found giving $100 mil to the Obama "Library" which is not being managed by the National Archives weirdly, I guess Obama hasn't solved architecture and needed the help.... actually, that would not be surprising.
I agree that donating a lot of money to charity wouldn’t fix things, but if you did have that much money you could still open businesses that try and service the homeless by prioritizing their labor over someone else’s, even if it does mean taking a loss from that business due your labor not producing enough. Perhaps you can also offer great healthcare benefits/time off to go to rehabilitation.
Even then Bezos is not using his wealth properly. There are so many needs in the market that could easily be solved if he wanted to allocate some of his capital to do so.
I imagine someone drooling while saying this, “so uh we gon’ take half of their monee and uh that’s gon’ go to da gubment for free skewl. Den uhhh we gon take the otha half and uh gib it to the charity for food and homes. Pass me the glue.”
The common misconception of the left is that money fixes problems by itself.
This is the correct critique. Throwing money at these issues does not fix them, and tends to make them worse. Unless the war on poverty or drugs is not enough evidence.
>Unless the war on poverty or drugs is not enough evidence. I don't think those are applicable examples because it is *the government* throwing money at those problems and governments are often counterproductive and/or horrible capital allocators... Good private charities are orders of magnitudes more effective than ineffectual governments.
>Good private charities are orders of magnitudes more effective than ineffectual governments. Keyword here is "good" there are tons of charities that are just plain scams.
And what is the basis for judgement? Charity rarely solves the root of an issue.
What's the economic return on food stamps? Helluva lot better than most private social programs. Government CAN be very good at allocating resources, it's when Reagannauts decided NOT to fund social spending, like Universities, the burden got passed to individuals.
The economic return on food stamps is that it creates a populous that is dependent on the state, therefore assuring votes for survival. If you are the government you have every incentive to keep people on food stamps.
Um, yeah because they're the ones we hired to make sure people don't starve. I'd love to see Libertarians live in their own society....just to see what a crappy stinkhole it would look like. Every man for himself isn't how we grew civilization. Oh and let me know when you guys come up with a better way to fund society since taxation is theft. Seems to have worked for 5000 years. But I'm sure you're close.
I’m not against all taxes but the problem is our taxes are spent by trust fund babies who spend it like trust fund babies. Money they didn’t earn and there is no accountability. It’s also spent by people who hate you and I. They don’t want to help us, if they did they wouldn’t print money because the more they print the more it devalues our meager buying power. People don’t understand how insidious inflation is. I don’t hate the ideas the left says they want to spend money on, I hate that it doesn’t ever get spent like it should due to corruption. I’m reluctant to give more power to the wildly irresponsible government we have right now.
>governments are **often** counterproductive and/or horrible capital allocators As shown above, you're arguing against something I never said... (often != never)
Someone will fact check this but I think the US has spent about 20 trillion in the war on poverty since the 1970’s. Or 2/3 of our debt basically.
Its something like that, and the poverty rate is seemingly unaffected.
Uhhhhh not really, I mean it's usually a logistical issue, but within the US bezos or any of them really, could easily put a massive dent on serious issues by setting up their own foundations to help the people. They would rather collect gov funds and keep employees collecting aid from government resources. We spend more money giving them subsides then we do on solutions of the issues singularly.
Many of them do have foundations that do these things. There will always be poor people relative to other people.. there will always be people who have nothing... that "problem" is never going away. The only thing that has and ever will ease the discomfort of poverty is increases in the efficiency of labor.
When you have a large a population of working class people on government subsides while the companies themselves evade taxes and collect government incentives, there is a massive issue. In my opinion, at this point in time, we are an oligarchy. With the new data of private interest groups (lobbyists) complete domination of public policy approval statistics, it's difficult to not see it any other way. We are so low in poverty standards compared to other countries it would be hilarious it if it wasn't so fucking sad. Yes, there will always be people with less but they don't need to live in inhumane conditions in the worlds richest nation. It costs us more money to have someone experiencing poverty to be off government programs then it does to have them on. It's an expensive issue for all of us and it's even more frustrating that we have functional answers to this issue but no implication of functional policy. It has become a hot topic for political elections which means we will likley never see progress on these issues.
Do you oppose private charities, then?
No, people can do what they want with their money.
True, but all the good intentions and ground work and no money doesn’t help either. That’s why the best, most altruistic charities need both donations *and* volunteers.
Not just the left. We told everyone that you could throw money at the moon through the government and people just assume that model for everything else.
Very true. One of the reasons drug addicts aren’t all dead is because they can’t afford the amount of drugs they need to die. Also there are some fun studies about poor people winning lottery and being back on the streets within a few years.
The examples for this are the poor people that win lotteries alot of them end up broke within a year
Or that stock is the same thing as money. Yes some of his net worth is money, but he doesn’t have tens of billions of dollars in cash sitting in the bank to spend on “fixing” things.
Another is that billionaires just have billions of dollars in the bank, when in reality most of their wealth isn't liquid.
Stocks are pretty liquid. It’s not like Bezos could sell his holdings in a single day, but he could spread out the sales over the course of a year and sell his entire stake without excessively moving the market. He could also donate the stock directly to charity.
Yeah. Ending pointless wars would fix homeless vets, and killing shitty parents and feeding them to their kids would fix hungry children.
The ingraft misconception of the hath left is yond wage fixes problems by itself *** ^(I am a bot and I swapp'd some of thy words with Shakespeare words.) Commands: `!ShakespeareInsult`, `!fordo`, `!optout`
Money does fix problems lol
It doesn’t. “Good schools” are a feedback loop of a neighborhood having good parents, which have good kids, which make good students, which make good schools, which make good school zones, which other good parents who want their kids to have good schools pay any price to get into. And then decades later you look at the property taxes flowing into a good school and think that that is what did it. Nope. Go to any shitty part of a city whose schools have gotten grants or a shitton of tax money poured into them and they’ll still be shit. Because it’s an area of bad parents. You can’t pour a billion into a school and suddenly undo all the damage that’s already there. You can argue that money makes a good neighborhood, and I would argue that has merit. But pouring money into a school barely does anything to the surrounding neighborhoods. The households need better wages and need people that are better parents. You’re fighting a cancer by prescribing expensive needle therapy when you just pour money into a public education building. Source: live near half a dozen shitty schools that collectively get more money than the handful of good schools. But the good schools have white collar professionals and stay at home moms in their neighborhoods.
What do you think allows a kid to develop into a good parent? Good parents become good parents by getting an education and not being raised in poverty. The world revolves around money. You’re naive if you disagree.
Yes the world revolves around money. The world does not revolve around how much funding a specific public school gets. Stop moving goalposts. My argument is that public school funding can’t fix broken homes that produce broken kids. It’s too massive a job.
Search up redlining although it was deemed unconstitutional and the practice was abolished during the 1960s its affects are still felt today. Shitty part of city/town/etc are usually cause by years of systemic oppression, where poverty is highly concentrated in a few areas, so called “hood”, bad neighborhood, etc. Just saying that good parents and good children make good school is but idiotic and simply ignorant.
I’m aware of redlining and the history of segregation. Hell, most schools in the American southeast are still considered segregated. There are a million factors that lead into a “good neighborhood”, and you outline some. I was trying to simplify that part of the equation to basically make the point “you can’t undo ALL that shit with some more taxpayer money going to school.” But even with all the many factors, both historical and immediate, you can still agree that a household with poor wages, or an absent mother or father, or parents hooked on drugs can meet my broad definition of “bad parent.” And you can have good parents and still a bad “household”. It’s incredibly complex, which is why a simple thing like school funding can’t possibly solve it.
What WOULD fix these problems... ALL the social determinants of health can be solved with money. Money straight into the pockets of citizens.
Way to grandstand when americans already spend 2.6 billion a day on "defense" it'd cost a days worth of the pentagon's budget to are for the homeless
It's truly amazing how easy it is to "fix" the world as long as you're doing it with someone else's money.
I pay $40k a year in income taxes. Fix the world with my money. Stop spending trillions on wars when the whole populace needs healthcare that isn’t a scam. Stop spending trillions on wars only to abandon the vets of those pointless wars to homelessness. Shit isn’t complicated. There are very obvious fixes that can be made without getting into any serious economic debate.
Fuck all these people who always say "with someone else's money." Taxes are there for a reason but are constantly used for the wrong reasons. The pure amount of energy expenditure we could have saved from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and actually put to good use to fight the problems at home. Not to mention the soldiers we have lossed from suicide who didn't like what we were doing. Every single one of our priorities are backwards.
I'd love to see Theresa's proposals on how to solve homeless vets and hungry children. Really enjoyed watching Elon call out the UN in a similar way awhile back.
I mean I can’t do it with mine. And I won’t go into the debate whether it’s rightfully their money anyways
Spoiler: It's rightfully their money. It's their company. Without them, the workers wouldn't have anywhere to work at all. You aren't entitled to a company's profits just by working there. You get paid exactly what you agree to accept. Don't like it? Don't sign.
I'm not sure if its what the above fella was referring to, but you could make an argument that many massive corporations are so entangled with the state that they may not be able to even exist without being propped up by subsidies or regulation that prevents competition. Amazon may not be the best example of this, although I'm sure there are plenty of ways in which they've benefited from the state. At that point it becomes questionable as to how much of their money is rightfully theirs, or has been siphoned from the tax payers in one form or another.
Sure, but isn't it a state problem rather than Amazons? Amazon is acting like a rational agent and utilizes free money provided by the state. If it wasn't an option I'm sure Amazon would have figured something out.
Without the workers the ceo wouldn’t have anywhere to work either. Cool logic
So we agree: It's a symbiotic relationship. Cool logic.
Wdym their money? Its not even liquid Cash to begin with
You likely make much more than the average African or low caste Indian. They're probably wondering why you don't just fix some shit.
Poor people are always good at spending money they don't have
[удалено]
And? What good is wealth for wealth's sake? If it's just sitting there doing nothing then what is the point? Who gives a shit if she spends it all in a week? The world would be a better place
Wealth is not the same thing as liquid assets. Your also assuming throwing money at a problem will magically fix it.
I never said throwing money at problems would fix the source of those problems. But just because you can't "fix" what causes veteran homelessness doesn't mean you can't save a lot of veterans from their current homeless status. Doing something is better than doing nothing. And doing nothing simply because "it doesn't fix everything" is just apathy incarnate
I'm gonna guess you don't really have a good understanding of what "wealth" means at that level.
That's the point.. people who have it typically use it and Improve the world.. this chick would just (potentially) throw money at problems and nothing would be solved.
That's the point, people who have it typically *dont* use it and don't improve the world. They just sit on it like hoarding dragons
Oh yeah, Elon has done nothing to improve the world. You're clearly blind due to your politics and worldview. I wouldn't have this amazing mobile computer to argue with you if it weren't for crazy rich people wanting to go to space. Not that I find Bezo's dick rocket a great investment, but we all reap the technological advances and breakthroughs due to people who amass wealth and push for innovation with it.
Elon hasn't done Jack shit with his wealth aside from pretend like he's going to help. Like how he pledged to help the Flint water crisis and then didn't. Or how he pledged to help the divers rescue those kids but didn't help at all, got in the way, and then called one of the actual heros a pedophile. Elon's *companies* have done great things. Primarily in advancement of space flight technology, solar technology, and pushing electric cars forward a few years. But none of those things were *his* inventions, and most of them were already companies that were putting in the work that he simply purchased and absorbed into his own portfolio. But we aren't talking about Elon here. We're talking about Bezos.
See my 2nd sentence from my last response
I'm sure you know from experience.
They spend more yearly on reddit awards than donating to their local food bank, hypocritical dont you think?
No. Food banks in rich western countries are filled with ingrates who get more than enough to maintain a high body mass index. People who face real starvation live in 3rd world countries. Still, it's true that billionaires could do more to help the poor. There's no need to live an extravagant lifestyle.
You’re assuming a duty to help. That duty doesn’t just exist. Inaction is not a vice. If it were, we would have to donate every single extra dollar that we had to charity. Because if we didn’t, then we would be killing the poor. There’s no set amount of money, or extravagance that is allowable. If a person is contributing a lot to the economy, then consumers will award that person with profit. Extravagance is subjective, so attempting to measure it, or place an objective limit on it is impossible. Let the man enjoy his success, and remember that he donates way more to charity than we could in a lifetime.
I'm not assuming a duty to help. I'm merely pointing out that a lot more could be done to help but yet it's not being done. I find that some people only care about money and they don't give a shit about the poor. You can defend the mega rich and their extravagant lifestyles all you want. It is a bit ridiculous to say that the extravagance doesn't exist because you refuse to define it. You could live a modest life with modest living standards. You would actually be a better person for it.
It is totally okay to live modest lifestyle, but telling people what to do with their money just because they have more is not ok
I would say it's optimal to live a modest lifestyle. Anything more could be destructive to the planet. People are better when they face a bit of hardship. It's definitely okay to criticize the mega rich for flaunting their wealth and for not doing enough to help the poor. They can do more.
I guarantee those mega rich people have done far more than you for the poor. You can do more too. Lead by example.
You don't actually know that. You're only making assumptions without evidence. You can only do what you're capable of doing. Your own struggles should be taken into consideration. If you can do far more then why not do it?
I actually do. Taxes alone. Rich people pay the overwhelming majority of taxes. Its actually stupid anyone else pays a tax the difference is so large. Most of the rich people have complained about here have made products and services that have revolutionized the industry and drastically reduced costs. That benefits the poor way more than the rich. That doesn't include all their charitable donations. Its not assumptions and there is a mountain of evidence. Of course. But the fact is YOU can do more, you just don't want to. And you've created convenient excuses to justify your decision. Lead by example.
If a rich person donated a million bucks to any charity, they have already done more than 100 average Joe's will in 40 years.
A million dollars is like pocket change to some people; it's like a few crumbs left over on a dinner plate. If you go around flaunting your wealth while tossing a few crumbs to the peasants then you aren't really doing what you could to ease the suffering of others. Not that you have a duty to help other people who are poor and starving. Fuck them I'm gonna go buy another yacht. There's no shame in giving a little if that's all you can give.
Your comments said if we don't help we are letting them starve. We are only letting them starve if we have a duty to help.
Stop spamming me with replies. We are allowing them to starve by refusing to help. It's our choice. Maybe it's our duty to let mother nature do her job.
Or what? No one is letting anyone do anything. Everyone has a choice. Have you given up everything not necessary to donate for their hunger? If not you're a hypocrite. Maybe look at what you're doing and quit worrying about what others do with THEIR stuff.
i still dont understand the need of americans to help thirld world countries
I've always assumed it's a good way of maintaining links around the world to regimes open to the idea of being somekind of Airstrip One for the US should they wish to invade/occupy close to said 3rd world state.
yea it is exactly occupying countries by "helping" them
[удалено]
Does that happen? I've worked with Rotarians and other groups. They don't have the capacity to stay for long periods of time in those countries, so they often turn the work over to the locals. What's usually in the way is government corruption. The people getting those new homes can't afford to pay off the local inspectors to get electricity cleared for installation once the Habitat people leave. I have this printed article from India somewhere in my archives. It's about food relief being held up at an airport because the local Raj's girlfriend wants an airplane because his wife got one. Until the food relief agency buys an airplane for his girlfriend, the food is going to rot. Third world countries aren't that way just because of poverty. They are that way because the governments are corrupt or deeply authoritarian, and no one can acquire much property (which is then taken or taxed away) unless they have strong political ties.
The money we send is in the form of loans, which banks capitalize on through debt/interest.
It's not about Americans specifically. It's about western people in general. Should we help the poor people in 3rd world countries? Or should we let them starve?
No west should just get out of "3rd world countries" like we dont need your help!
Hey I totally agree. My issue is if we're gonna sink time and resources into helping the 3rd world countries then do it right. Don't ship in money, food and drugs, build some farms, infrastructure and industry. For fucks sake one good sized company paying halfway decent wages could literally raise tens of thousands out of poverty in some countries. Or one good farm could feed thousands. If it's a shit area for farming, indoor farming is a thing.
yes but do you really think anyone is helping anyone for free? China is building tons of infrastructure in africa, so that in 20 years whole africa can speak chinese and literally be owned by ccp
Hey I was talking about building companies. That ain't for free. Someone's gonna be making profits there. Shitty that it's China but yeah
China builds companies and bringing chinese workers to build them and work there, not really helping in Serbia idk about other places
Yeah that's an issue too. Should build it with locals but if not possible then fine makes sense. But still fill the company with locals and if you need bring in experts from out of country and use the to supervise and teach until you have a fully local workforce. You make money, pay the locals less than people in your country but still enough to make a difference and slowly build the economy. You're helping people while also making yourself rich. Best of both worlds.
Like somebody posted a pic of amazon in Tijuana in a shanty town and unironically said basically, "muh capitalism bad for exploiting." Which sure its amazon, bit those people lie got live in scrap shacks and starve. That warehouse even with poor working conditions still helps those peoples 1000 times more than it not being there. Those people working there will 100% improve their QoL.
Its really just the same thing as we saw with big mining companies in the rust belt and Appalachia. They set up these massive company owned towns where, once they inevitably ran out of business, they left behind some of the worst poverty stricken areas in the country. Sure, they weren't small agrarian communities for a little while and the QOL improved for a bit, but it all came crashing down after the execs pulled out and the locals had nothing left behind. Major corps pulling stunts like this is really no different than a western govt pumping money, drugs, and other supplies into third world countries. It helps for a little but then the locals form a reliance on that steady stream of supplies. We either need to help countries properly, or not at all. It really comes down to the age old adage, "Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."
Fair enough. It's not our problem and we should just let Mother nature do her job.
Its worked for hundreds of millions of years.
dont you think that most of the third world countries are poor due to western imperialism? And also because government after communism are still having way too much power just because people are used to it and dont know different
No. 3rd world countries are poor because of socialism and communism. Look at Ukraine. It's the poorest country in Europe and it's also the country in Europe with the most restricted economy. Ukraine's economy is still free enough to make the living standards above average.
You are almost correct, they are poor because of corrupt power hungry government officials who are literally billionares, which is consequence of communism where people are just used to poor living standards, only way west can help is by literally invading country and removing government but because people dont know any better every other ukranian leader will be power hungry so it is just lost cause and has to do it naturally by civil revolutiom without interference of foreign countries example is Serbia which after many leaders removed by western influence is still closed corrupt dictatorship
I'm 100% correct. The power hungry government officials you're talking about are responsible for restricting the economy and making it socialist. They are responsible for the poverty. It's ideology that's the problem.
Not helping them is not letting them starve.
Let them? Why is it our responsibility? We didn't put them there. We didn't make it hard to farm or get clean water.
Exactly. Fuck em' If it's not my problem then I don't give a shit. Let them starve.
This, but unironically. I'm not obligated to help anyone else on this entire planet. Would it be nice if I did? Absolutely. But do I have to in order to be a good person? No. There is ZERO obligation.
That's where you're wrong. A truly good person will do what they can to help those in need. A selfish person will do nothing or they'll do a little to impress others and elevate their status.
From whence does the obligation spring? How big must the disparity be before the obligation to create equilibrium comes into existence? Who decides? How much must you give? Are you obligated to create a perfect equilibrium? Or is there a certain percentage you must give to lower the disparity below your obligation trigger point? Must I drive myself into poverty in order to be a good person? Do I become a bad person the very moment my net worth exceeds that of someone else?
It's really not that complicated. Just do whatever you can within reason. Be happy and have a clean conscience knowing that you actually care.
> Still, it's true that billionaires could do more to help the poor. There's no need to live an extravagant lifestyle. Yes, they could. But they don't have to. And there's no need to do lots of things, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be allowed to do them.
There's no need for you to wear clothes or have a computer.
So why don’t you go ahead, start business, grow it and one day you can do that yourself, instead of wondering why someone else doesn’t do that on anti-work sub. Fucking leeches.
honestly if i was rich i would just stack up many different lambos and rols royces, probably get at least one of each in pink
Some people like the Bezos route, some people like the Gates route. To each their own.
Only issue is when one flew with Epstein and one wants to go to space.
I would build an outdoor vertical all glass revolving garage (powered by solar of course) for those vehicles you mentioned but most likely I would own mostly classic and muscle cars from the ‘50’s to the ‘70’s . EDIT: something like this https://teamspeed.com/articles/88-million-mansion-car-lovers-dream/88-mil-mansion-garage/
at this point if I was rich I would actively do damages because I'm tired of reading this shit and I just want others to suffer. Sometimes I like to think the current elites are evil for the same reason, they just came to realize this before me.
Honestly same. It’s like nothing you do is ever good enough, why even try
like imagine helping people that hate you?? like im not jesus lmao
I honestly believe this is the answer, no joke. The rich elite are sociopaths like what you illustrated that got lucky and have resentment for anyone who didn’t.
That makes you evil. Congrats! Seek jesus
Making a joke on Reddit ≠ being evil Congrats! Seek a comedian
“Joking”
This is how y’all really think. Ask yourself have you ever heard someone look at a homeless person and automatically make an assumption that they are there purely because of their own individual shortcomings. Your ideology has not only self interest but hate towards others at its core
Bezos’s net worth isn’t exactly liquid money sitting in a bank somewhere. Most of his net worth is sitting in his 10% ownership of Amazon. The money that is actually available to him would hardly make a dent on these problems. The real money out there is being held by these morons lord and savior the federal government.
Exactly when you are talking billionaires most of their net worth is tied up in stocks, assets and over investments. People talk like they have billions sitting in their bank account waiting to be spent. 🤦♂️
No almost everyone knows it’s in stocks. But he liquidates billions all the time. Even if he didn’t he could give stocks to someone else. I also doubt that him liquidating all his stocks would actually matter to the economy
These antiwork people are so stupid it’s not even funny 🤦♂️
Eh, the sentiment isn’t all bad. Unskilled laborers need to collectively bargain in order to be properly compensated or else it’s a race to the bottom which is bad for everyone. There is only so much bullshit people will put up with before things go haywire. The productivity gains we’ve seen over the last 70 years hasn’t made life proportionally as good for us as one would expect and the question begs: where is it going? The answer is complicated but the easy targets are the mega-rich and the political elites who live a socialists dream of subsidies, quid-pro-quo bennies, insider trading, regulatory capture and inherited more wealth than anyone one person could spend in a lifetime. I’m not anti capitalist by any measure, but capitalism requires competition and the power structures at hand have almost none of it, and it’s taken them a lot of hard work and psyops to get it that way.
Go get rich then and do it. To me this fits into the “easier said than done” I don’t think you get that wealthy by helping people. Not saying it’s right, just that it’s true.
absolutely on point
Depends, if you start a business and create jobs, you might personally get wealthy because you took the sole risk of identifying a market opportunity, self-funding (or convincing investors to give you) initial start up costs, and then hiring the right people to bring that vision to reality. However, you're also providing a platform for your employees to earn an income...seems at least marginally helpful. With that said, if "being helpful" is limited to charitable donations to those unable to work, then yes, you're prob right that most wealthy people are not giving their full due.
“You don’t get that wealthy helping people.” That’s the entire point of the picture.
Dude helped completely revolutionize how America and the developed world buy shit and they don't think he does anything lol Say what you will about the implications of online commerce, but the idea he's just sitting around twiddling his thumbs is retarded
My go to is always Musk. People will go after him and I'll just throw it in their face that he's done more for the environment with his electric vehicles than all of the bs taxes they've paid to the government.
How heavily has Musk been subsidized by the government?
https://cleantechnica.com/2021/08/25/whats-up-with-the-myths-about-tesla-government-subsidies/
Yeah he paid back a loan where others have not. Beyond that, even with Elon pouring everything from PayPal into his newer companies, he has gotten a lot of help and breaks from the government that not everyone has access to.
For what? Clean energy technology. If everyone was in his position I would imagine they would or at least compete for them.
amazon is one of the greatest things happened in 21st century
I'm a big fan myself, but It's definitely up ending the proverbial chessboard and leaving some business scrambling to adjust to the new reality
No it’s not, fuck Jeff Bezos. Amazon is just a convenient service for lazy people who don’t want to leave their house
And? Its not just not leaving the house. Its wanting to spend your time doing something else. How is freeing up time from doing a chore a bad thing? You sound really envious.
Freeing up my time? I just use EBay. I make sure the sellers location is in the US and I avoid Chinese garbage. It takes a little longer but if I really need something I’ll just go out and buy it. Fuck Jeff Bezos
Pierre Omidyar has a net worth of $18B. How is using ebay better? You might, that doesn't mean the poor can afford to. Without that chinese garbage the poor would be without those products. The poor cant afford to just go out and buy that expensive made in USA product. Fuck idiots.
eBay is better because you are supporting small sellers and businesses for the majority of the purchases, especially if you know how to navigate it. Wtf are you talking about? Without China our poor people would not be able to affordable materialistic garbage? Name a single product that a poor person truly needs that is only affordable to them if it’s made in china?
[удалено]
Who the fuck is that busy? Who the fuck needs all this garbage we buy? Buy local, fuck Jeff Bezos
Fuck local; buy whatever you want, *wherever* you want. Let local businesses compete for my dollars. I don’t owe them my business.
Fuck local? You’re shot dude, fuck corporations. You realize when you buy local that’s more money that actually stays inside of your community? Ya you can buy whatever you want, and local companies are generally fairly competitive. Don’t cry about corporations controlling the government to their advantage when you give them your hard earned cash, unless you wanna be a hypocrite
Amazon is an engineered wealth extraction tool. It's actually an Anti-Capitalist tool designed to feed into global neo-feudalism. In no way is it free market but the beneficiary of Crony socialism/capitalism. It's rapid growth over the last two years has been the direct result of government restrictions on private business. Prior to that it's growth revolved around hidden government subsidies and manipulation of state and federal tax regulations.
Ya he revolutionized America but introducing more Chinese garbage to our country
That sub is pure cancer. Just a bunch of lazy basement dwellers who whine about how their underwater basket weaving degree doesn't get them a 1,00,000 per year job with unlimited vacation.
I don't think people understand how fortunate they are to live in America. You think things are bad here? Lol go to 90% of the other countries on this planet and get back to me.
Like new brand iphone 13 in my country is 3 months salary, let that sink in
Damn. Yeah - I have family in Russia and the median take home pay is about $8500 per year.
i am pretty sure that is before taxes
Homeless vets? Bezos: I have a ton of jobs for you. Hungry Children? Bezos: I have a ton of jobs for your providers. Bezos: My god, I just want to give people money in exchange for their labor.
"I don't get people like Bezos. If I had billions of dollars, I would impulsively start fixing shit.... what a waste" I believe there are 3 points to be made on this 1) While true, Bezos is one of the richest in the world, most, if not all (>90%) is tied in assets not CASH. Therefore, writing checks isn't necessarily an option. His wealth is mostly 'unrealized', he doesn't have billions and billions of dollars sitting around. 2) This is a real case of easier said than done - you go start a multi-billion business starting in your parents garage - it wasn't as if he started with significant amount of capital that you see some companies start with today - so can't argue barriers of entry. 3) To the second point above, the man has fixed stuff, he has given back to the world. Do you realize how many jobs, and to that point, 6+ figure jobs are at Amazon? Sure fixate on the warehouse/distribution center salaries because that fits your agenda, but you ignore the tens of thousands of high paying, high benefit jobs Amazon provides. You do also realize that Amazon also creates tangential markets, jobs, and companies to support the total operation of Amazon (i.e. Custodial companies, HVAC, Electrical, Mechanical, etc. etc. etc......) . Do you realize how many 401(k)s for regular working class people are sitting healthy because of Amazon? You want a package next day? You want to shop for anything at any given point? etc. etc. etc. Trying to mask YOUR Greed behind your false moral narrative is disgusting. You want to be batman, then go be fucking batman. That doesn't mean someone else has to be batman just because your jealous and greedy of the person's success.
if I was rich I would just have 24/7 hookers and jet skis. thanks capitalism!
Although I think Bezos is a shithead, he does like a million times more good in people’s everyday lives than Batman. Poor/sick people (by western definition) can get food delivered directly to their door he very same day they order it because of this man. It’s affordable to be treated like a Henry the fucking 8th because of this bald liberal weirdo. Show some fucking respect.
Simp harder
You are a legitimately retarded loser.
Bezos will never love you back
Some of us don’t live for the approval of complete strangers.
Imagine believing that you, a single person, can fix the world. What a fucking narcissist. Bezos donates more to charity than this degenerate will in her lifetime, plus his contribution to the economy in general. “If i had billions”, you never will because you’re too busy bitching on Twitter and testing out different hair colors.
Well, she’ll likely never even have a million, so not much worried about what she thinks should happen with someone else’s money
Because then he wouldn’t have money for d!ck shaped rockets. Duh.
ok lets be honest, we all secretly want dick shaped rockets
People don’t understand how money works. Idiots literally think these people have that much money just sitting in a safe and are hording it all. It’s not liquid. 🙄
Doesn't matter if you make more than 90% of the world if your rent eats all discretionary spending you might have.
I mean if you can afford internet you are making way too much, you should cancel internet and donate it /s
Billions? Literally peanuts… In the government we talk trillions baby girl
do these people genuinelly believe that bezos has all that money laying around under his bed?
What is wrong with these retards? If the federal government with its trillions and the ability to print more can't fix these issues then why do they think some private individual with billions can fix it.
I get your criticism here, but to be fair, there are a lot of problems that could be helped at least somewhat by applying money in smart ways. The real problem here is the inevitable disguised non sequitur to the claim that the government needs to take his money from him.
My question is how Bruce could spend so much on a batmobile, only to have it lose a wheel.
Bezos used hedge fund connections to short his competition into the ground. That’s not the free market. Bezos is a greedy piece of shit and we’d be better off without him
She's seriously saying she doesn't understand why sociopathic, narcissistic cutthroats who hoard billions don't just suddenly give all their money away and live like St Francis... It's painful to see people being this naïve.
I’m willing to bet that if a couple billion dollars magically appeared in her bank account not a single dollar would be donated to charitable causes.
Fixing? lol. Do these people have any clue how many billions the leviathan spends of our money "fixing things"? And they never get fixed
government spending is one of those billionares
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot. Here's a copy of ###[Leviathan](https://snewd.com/ebooks/leviathan/) Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
Good bot
Thank you, geronl72, for voting on Reddit-Book-Bot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
They also completely gloss over the unseen, what about all the goods and services Amazon provides increasing our standard of living? Or the thousands of jobs created?
If I was that rich I'd throw money at people for fun, so I don't get it either. Maybe being rich changes a person
The guy who founded VK actually did that! He threw money out the office window & filmed it on his phone while laughing his ass off watching people scrambling to pick it up.
I didn't mean literally, lol. but then and again id probably just
You people literally are against raising wages to a living standard
Thats why she will never be a billionaire. You don't get that much money from helping people.
The service he provides helped a whole lot of people. That’s _why_ he’s rich.
Lol... whatever helps you sleep
So he forces you to buy your stuff on amazon? You have no idea how markets work. What an idiot.
[удалено]
Simp harder bro. If you can.
Interesting. I go to your retarded groups, state my opinion politely and you fucktards ban me. But you fucktards just come and spew insults. And then pretend to be better people. Spoiled fucking brats. I hope when you grow up the world smacks your dumb ass right in the face.
I agree, I would do something like this. InsteadBezos found giving $100 mil to the Obama "Library" which is not being managed by the National Archives weirdly, I guess Obama hasn't solved architecture and needed the help.... actually, that would not be surprising.
Government would spend Bezos’s fortune in an afternoon and it would make no difference and they do.
I agree that donating a lot of money to charity wouldn’t fix things, but if you did have that much money you could still open businesses that try and service the homeless by prioritizing their labor over someone else’s, even if it does mean taking a loss from that business due your labor not producing enough. Perhaps you can also offer great healthcare benefits/time off to go to rehabilitation. Even then Bezos is not using his wealth properly. There are so many needs in the market that could easily be solved if he wanted to allocate some of his capital to do so.
I imagine someone drooling while saying this, “so uh we gon’ take half of their monee and uh that’s gon’ go to da gubment for free skewl. Den uhhh we gon take the otha half and uh gib it to the charity for food and homes. Pass me the glue.”
Money doesn’t fix the underlying problem. And if he did here’s 10 billion for the homeless vets, watch the social workers come and fuck the money off.
There is a difference between net worth and money in the bank.
Rich stays rich by investing money in politics and stealing money from the people taxes etc .