InterestingUsername[serious]
Astronut
InfernoWarriorThe frick?
They’re trying.
bizarrolandWhat a modest proposal
Reminds me of this bit from Mitchell and Webb
youtu.be/s_4J4uor3JE
That Mitchell and Webb Look - Kill All The Poor
I wonder if anyone has asked ChatGPT. I’m kind of afraid to
MrSelfDestructDead Kennedys wrote a song about it
thisbenzingringKill, kill, kill, kill, kill the poor
46 years old and still relevant. Maybe this is why so many conservatives think they’re punk rock, media literacy and satire are dead and they’re like “yes, let’s kill the poor”.
kill a couple billionares and give their wealth to the poor people and they wont be poor anymore and it a lot less killing…
2 or 3 instead of millions, I think that math works out pretty well
Why kill them? I would rather they compete on a reality TV show to not get fired from a soul sucking benefitless job at their former corporations.
finallymadeanaccountI’d watch a reality TV show where people like Musk had to work for a week in a mine, or on an oil rig, doing the hardest jobs. They wouldn’t last a minute.
They had that stupid undercover boss show but it was nothing but a shameless commercial for the company and patronizing pandering to the slave class.
Or Bumfights. What do you think they’ll be using the Temu Colosseum for after it’s first spectacle?
Money would be devalued quite a bit, since production capacity doesnt randomly jump. If everyone is rich, no one is
Sounds like a good thing
If people had money and were able to take care of their needs, they would spend more than the billionaire who just keeps it but doesn’t use it. Money spent would drive the economy creating revenue that can be reinvested into the business to increase efficiency and capacity.
But to address your point, redistributing billionaire wealth directly into workers hands wouldn’t make everyone rich. Yes people would have more money, at least at first. This is why socialists believe in controlling the means of production. Desperate people cannot afford to go on strike and they cannot take time off work to vote. They can’t afford to take time to find better jobs.
Fair wages doesn’t make everyone poor. Arguing that everyone can’t be rich isn’t a sincere argument. You’re arguing that we need people to be poor and desperate.
I wasn’t arguing against wealth distribution. Im just saying its crazy to believe if everyone were millionaire, everyone could afford what current millionaires can afford. I think the wealth assessment of few individuals is a systematic failure of capitalism. No individual can work enough that they should have a million times that of the average citizen. I think having certain variation in pay grade and wealth can be okay if it serves the best interest of the public and entices people to work hard. The economy would be driven by spending, yes but that spending would devalue money quickly. Also billionaires have most money in company shares, land etc, not liquid cash. Inheritance and wealth tax can do a decent amount to reduce inequality I believe. A good social safety net would also make the US a much better place for the average citizen.
People are just misunderstanding my argument. Although I don’t think violent means like mentioned here are the way to go. But what am I even saying we are in a shitpost community after all.
You don’t need to make everyone millionaires. You do need to give everyone secure access to food, housing and healthcare.
Yes, that is very reasonable and has been the standard in most developed nations for a while now outside the US. Although in the US it would quickly be decried as “communism” or whatever (ignoring the fact the US healthcare system is the most expensive in the world)
Bro solved the trolley problem.
Why can’t we, as a society, just take Musk’s money and redistribute it? It is absolutely stupid that we allow someone to have more money than he can use while so many people can’t afford to live
Realistically it’s not liquid assets like it is for you and me. They purchase items that “appreciate” like land and art, then take loans out using them as collateral to then get them appraised higher to take out another loan to pay off the other one then use the extra for living on. They don’t live on dividends or income, it’s a game of loans that they have a small army of accountants running. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t take those assets. Just that it doesn’t translate into immediate cash flows for people.
Wispy2891Most of those trillions are unrealized gains based on completely unrealistic valuation in “trust me bro” style
Like Tesla being worth more than all the western car manufacturers combined or xai being “worth” billions even if it’s losing billions every year.
The second he dumps those stocks, the house of cards would crash almost immediately
I swear people think billionaires have a giant vault of money like Scrooge McDuck. I have had to explain this to people so many times. His wealth is almost entered imaginary and based on the speculative possible future profits of his companies. If he ever tried to convert it into cash the value would go to zero.
His wealth isn’t imaginary when he uses it as collateral to borrow actual money, though.
That’s the weird part, when billionaires use their money, it’s real.
But when you discuss taking it away or taxing it, it’s suddenly just an imagination.
That’s the weird part, when billionaires use their money, it’s real.
But when you discuss taking it away or taxing it, it’s suddenly just an imagination.
It’s real enough to use as collateral to borrow actual money from banks.
Meatball ManThey would have to wipe out the vast majority of people on the planet. Like the VAST majority. They’d be killing themselves too because they would be killing off basically the entire work force that holds society together. What little of humanity that remains would just be doomed to die a slower death, as nobody would be around to produce food, mine resources, manufacture goods, keep supply lines moving, maintain public infrastructure.
They’d just be signing themselves up to slowly starve to death once the food runs out and nobody is around to make more of it. Not to mention it’s not like the vast majority of people are just going to sit around and be genocided by these monsters. The war effort alone would be enormous, and whoever is left would be traumatized.
Definitely a solid shit post.
[serious] because the very existence of the rich and poor means there are systems creating inequality.
Should you kill the poor, the next poorest group will be sucked of their money and will become poor.
The problem is not the poor, it’s the system that creates poverty.
For sure. Or put a more direct way, someone needs to be making drinks at Starbucks when the rich-enough-to-survive go there, someone needs to be boiling noodles and chopping onions all day for when they want pasta at a restaurant, someone needs to stand in the sun next to hot asphalt and lay it so they can drive over it.
And if it’s not the too-poor-to-live, it’s the next wrung down.
I think that’s my senator!
Programmer Belch[serious] Why not kill the richest people to make the poor people not poor?
Works in Victoria 3 why not in real life?
Like the Tories did in the UK
homeless people reading that sign in 2024
Ooh me first!
Ricky RigatoniCharge your phone
Because that would be genocide
And require the wholesale slaughter of your fucking workforce. We’re talking that as far as I’m concerned, 70% of us are in poverty compared to what’s available.
That’s what they’re doing currentaffairs.org/…/how-elon-musk-killed-hundred…
Nobody ever asks him about this, and he never responds to posts about it. Same for his begging to go to the island. He’ll pipe up on everything else nobody asked him about, but not those two subjects.
Chemical WonkaWill not kill oligarchs to solve poverty?
Efficiency and progress
Is ours once a-more
Yep. Sounds like a Redditor.
all tomorrow's regrets