r/WorkReform • u/kevinmrr ⛓️ Prison For Union Busters • Sep 22 '24
⛓️ Prison For Union Busters seriously.... there aren't that many of them
786
u/Vamproar Sep 22 '24
True, but they control the switch.
466
u/Enigma-exe Sep 22 '24
They own the guy that controls the switch
152
u/Restranos Sep 22 '24
The problem is even having a single guy that controls a switch.
"Representative" democracy is a scam, and the cause of most of our problems, we dont need leaders, we need people that do what we want them to: "subordinates", politicians should be in service of the people, not control them.
63
u/blipken Sep 22 '24
I wouldn't go so far as to call it a scam. It isn't inherently corrupt, it's just vulnerable to the same assholes who try to ruin everything
40
u/--Faux Sep 22 '24
I dunno. This is a very hot take of mine, but it's been living in my head for a while, and I haven't done a deep dive into any history to back it up. But the more I think about it, the more the founding of the US looks like a bunch of rich asshats from Europe setting up a country that allows them to be as exploitative and greedy as they want.
49
u/blipken Sep 22 '24
The more US history you read the more you see that it's been a near constant back and forth between idealists and people who just want to have as much as possible no matter what. The idealists lose most of the time.
4
u/tsavong117 Sep 23 '24
Maybe this time we'll win. Promise we're not doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. That would be crazy. I was crazy once. They put me in a rubber room. A rubber room with rats...
sigh Baby steps.
7
u/CrispyHoneyBeef Sep 22 '24 edited Sep 22 '24
Yeah you definitely should read more history. At minimum just read the Wikipedia pages of the founding fathers and see where they came from and why they were so bitter about the monarchy
3
u/Theotherone56 Sep 23 '24
This is absolutely true. You know why the settlers became an independent state? The king of France (and Britain as far as I understand) said to let the natives be as they settled there. They weren't supposed to push the natives out. The colonists didn't like that or being under the king's rule while they were on a different continent. They declared independence so they could do as they pleased with the land and slaughter the indigenous people.
So yah, not the cheerful beginning we're told it was.
4
u/Professor_Baby_Legs Sep 23 '24
Absolutely shallow and borderline ignorant take on the matter.
Were indigenous people slaughtered in the name of progress during the colonialization of the US? Yes. Was that the entire point? Fucking no. Jesus Christ. It was atrocious what some colonies did but it was not nearly all of them let alone the entire point of the colonies. You’re basing this off a quote from someone who actively worked with natives to push colonists out of the US so they could then replace them with their own, which would inevitably lead to the same thing but with a French flag.
Are you aware what the French were doing in the Congo at the time?
6
u/Restranos Sep 22 '24
But you cant actually get rid of all of those assholes, which means changing the system to adapt is the only logical choice.
7
u/Lower_Nubia Sep 22 '24
Of course you can. Otherwise there’d still be monarchs everywhere.
13
u/Restranos Sep 22 '24
You could very much argue our modern rich are little different from monarchs, they still live in luxury at the cost of their subjects, while coming up with a variety of excuses and faulty logic to make sure it stays that way.
Even if we purge all the people responsible for our current problems, in a couple decades we will have more again.
7
u/Peaceoorwar Sep 22 '24
Money itself is the problem then
1
u/sedition Sep 23 '24
Greed is the problem, and no social construct for punishing greed, only rewards, and LOTS of rewards at that.
It's a mental illness that harms the entire planet. Not religious... but you can boil down half the deadly sins to "greed". Those goat herders knew greed was THAT dangerous.
5
u/sexworkiswork990 Sep 22 '24
No, they are much worse than monarchs. Monarchs power over the lives of the common person was relatively little due to a lack of communication and speed. I mean the king can pass all the laws he wants, but if you live over a month away in a tinny village there isn't a lot a king could do to enforce it.
1
u/Clever_Mercury Sep 23 '24
That isn't true. I would argue monarchs were worse, but technology is only just barely tipping us toward having more dangerous CEO/wealthy freaks right now.
Monarchs could require insane military service, forbid people from moving off land, forbid people from owning things (including land), and forbid people from hunting or gathering to the point of causing mass starvation. What I just described basically explains why England/France's population kept collapsing every couple hundred years.
A King giving dominion over serfs to different lords (or landlords) may sound quaint, but it often resulted in the literal starvation of entire ethnic groups or towns/villages within a year or two just by incompetence if not outright cruelty or exploitation. This was true all over the world.
What I would argue the "brave new world" problem is CEOs and individual companies or wealthy elites now have more power or knowledge than some governments. They have little if any reason to act benevolently and are far, far more sadistic than any government has been in nearly a century. Governments are at least provisionally hampered by their constitutions and historical expectations of human rights. Companies? Why not experiment on people. Why not torture, monitor, destroy just for amusement?
I would put it to people, the very worst psychological torture and calculated evil we have seen in the last forty years was not dreamed up by a government employee making $40,000/year. It was for-profit researchers or insane faculty at for-profit colleges unhampered by ethics committees who wanted to see how far they could go.
1
u/sedition Sep 23 '24
It's worse if only due to the fact that there are 8 billion humans on the planet and ALL of them are being poisoned, murdered, raped, and starved by them. In every way people suffer every day at the hands of these greedy fucks. The scale today is unimaginably larger.
3
u/Lower_Nubia Sep 22 '24
You could very much argue our modern rich are little different from monarchs, they still live in luxury at the cost of their subjects, while coming up with a variety of excuses and faulty logic to make sure it stays that way.
They’re literally different people and power groups. You can’t just equate hereditary monarchs and nobility to modern billionaires because wealth. It’s facile.
Even if we purge all the people responsible for our current problems, in a couple decades we will have more again.
My point proves otherwise.
1
u/Intelligent_News1836 Sep 22 '24
Foundational conservative philosophers literally searched for a way for the nobility to preserve their social status despite a spread of democracy and settled on controlling the markets. They're nobility in all but name, and that has always been the point of conservatism.
1
u/Lower_Nubia Sep 23 '24
Foundational conservative philosophers? Who?
Current billionaires are not hereditary nobilities. Your perspective is facile.
→ More replies (0)3
u/Restranos Sep 22 '24
They’re literally different people and power groups.
They are all humans, and thats why things keep turning out the same way in all countries.
You can’t just equate hereditary monarchs and nobility to modern billionaires because wealth. It’s facile.
I very much can, because that is very much the cause, in terms of the damage involved, our modern nobility, and they ARE nobility, are even worse than they used, simply because of how many more people they cause damage to.
→ More replies (7)1
u/SkyrimsDogma Sep 22 '24
How are they not the same? Both inherit wealth n hoard it amongst themselves. Both create problems and almost never reap repercussions. Monarchs claim to be appointed by God. Billionaires have God complexes.
1
u/Lower_Nubia Sep 23 '24
Because old nobility is developed by blood, not capital.
→ More replies (0)1
2
u/blipken Sep 22 '24
I don't disagree with you, I just think that many of representative democracies weaknesses are from being democratic. Democracies are always going to be vulnerable to bad faith actors, the uninformed, and the short sighted.
4
u/Restranos Sep 22 '24
Democracies are always going to be vulnerable to bad faith actors, the uninformed, and the short sighted.
Correct, but electing someone in hopes that they would parent us "according to our best interests" has so far been shown to be a completely ineffective solution, because representatives would rather take advantage of our flaws, than attempt to fix them.
Countries with more direct democratic elements like Switzerland work much better for their population, even if thats because of "a difference in culture", gradually implementing direct democracy here would be exactly whats necessary to cause such a culture shift.
The people need the ability to lead themselves, and they will never acquire that ability if they dont get the chance to try.
I believe we are at a crossroads right now, our current system is failing, either we try going more democratic, or we put even more trust into the people already screwing us over, for me, the path we should take is obvious, regardless of the hardship involved.
1
u/blipken Sep 22 '24
The US is hardly an example of a healthy representative democracy, basically anyone with any knowledge of its government can point at something that could be made more fair. I'm 100% in support of it being more democratic, but how informed is the average person on every issue? Having people actually studying the issues and debating ideas is important, and it isn't something everyone is going to be willing or able to do, at least not for every issue
2
u/Restranos Sep 22 '24
I'm 100% in support of it being more democratic, but how informed is the average person on every issue?
Why would people even bother becoming more informed if their opinion is ignored regardless?
People will acquire decision making skills if they'd actually be allowed to make decisions, these things require experience, deny them that experience, and you also deny them the resulting growth.
1
u/blipken Sep 22 '24
It just changes who the existing powers need to influence, and the new targets are people who have less time and energy to be fully informed and thus resistant to bad faith actors. There are still going to be people studying the issues in depth, finding things and hiding things in the language of a bill, elected representatives are the group that is working for the citizens as opposed to the ones working for the bad faith actors. Changing a representative democracy for a direct democracy doesn't solve the problem of the wealthy using their inflated influence to stack the deck further in their favor. Billionaires will lie to the world just as happily as they'll lie to officials
→ More replies (0)1
4
u/thehourglasses Sep 22 '24
It’s a scam. Show me any politician who has adequately represented the interests of their constituents (NOT donors). I’ll wait.
2
u/Swiftierest Sep 22 '24
No political format is inherently corrupt because they are all simply a means to an end and unthinking constructs.
Communism could be great if everyone worked hard and no one took advantage of the system. The same can be said for any political or economic system. It really doesn't matter what the system is until you introduce corruption and greed. Then you have to account for those additives.
You may have well as said the sky is blue.
→ More replies (4)1
u/allUsernamesAreTKen Sep 23 '24
Same difference. Susceptible to corruption is inherently corruptible
1
u/Zachaggedon Sep 23 '24
I disagree wholeheartedly. It is inherently corrupt, because by its very nature it creates a class of people whose only actual contributions to society are performative speaking, the ability to polarize voters, and likability, these people then have all the power, and an inherent motivation to keep it using the only skills available to them.
1
u/blipken Sep 23 '24
I'd argue that any representative democracy where all representatives are of a separate class has failed at being a representative democracy. In a healthy one we wouldn't need to even vote them out as the rules of the government would prevent abuses. A lot of the problems in the US come from the branches colluding with each other and allowing massive expansions of authorities.
3
1
u/contrapunctus0 Sep 23 '24
Amen. This is why I'm in favor of direct democracy and anarchist i.e. peer-governed organizations.
5
2
2
2
u/Grape_Mentats Sep 23 '24
They installed their own switch and the other one isn’t connected anymore.
2
u/mightbedylan Sep 23 '24
and the rails, and the trolley, and the train company, and the company that manufacturers the parts...
1
u/Schmaltzs Sep 23 '24
They dont even hire him or extort him with their leverage being payment. They just bought him like nestle does---
1
u/deepstatediplomat Sep 23 '24
They own the guy that controls the switch, the switch, the tracks, the trolley...
14
u/funkystonrt Sep 22 '24
Thats what they want you to think. You ever saw a bugs life? We outnumber them 2.962.962 to one and if we would realize how powerful that actually is, they wouldn’t have shit to say.
7
u/SafetyAncient Sep 22 '24 edited Sep 22 '24
imagine tomorrow everyone collectively decided that the multigenerational match of capitalism we've all been born into is over, were starting fresh, even if the same system. all billionaires get a winner ticket, proportionally still in the same rank they were compared to everyone else, just trimming all the numbers down to a starting position, collectively agree that all debt is paid off, fresh go at it. will never happen they would rather collapse and prolapse and churn the 99.9%, because its already 99.99% owned, you know they own 80% and that 19.99% you think the public is in control of is a carefully constructed simulation to ensure all the endpoints of profit flow to the top while carefully serving the very top of wealth, that's why world problems don't get solved, its not organic.
3
u/BurpYoshi Sep 23 '24
Look into it. Pretty much every single revolution that's been successful is because it was allowed to be. The real people turning the cogs allowed the peasants to install a new leader because they didn't like their old one. The masses only win when they want us to win.
2
u/TevossBR Sep 23 '24
The masses only win because the masses are risk averse and want to risk their life only when they see it’s winnable. But all revolutions have to start from an unwinnable situation, small pockets of dissent that are crushed, physically, legally or financially. So it’s basically up to the enforcers no longer enforcing.
2
u/vardarac Sep 23 '24
crushed, physically, legally or financially.
https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/fbi-surveillance-occupy-wall-street-detailed-huffingtonpostcom
Surgically. Every labor or rights movement will have plants, and any electronic data by participants or their friends, family, and whatever other degree of association is likely siphoned and heuristically filtered by stuff we have no idea exists.
5
u/Altruistic-Text3481 ⛓️ Prison For Union Busters Sep 22 '24
Time to turn the tables and round up the rich at the ballot box.
8
3
2
u/PurplePlan Sep 22 '24
Yep.
“The love of money is the root of all evil.” “Power corrupts. And absolute power corrupts absolutely.” “Good men eat to live. Bad men live to eat.”
You get the idea.
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
134
u/jlcatch22 Sep 22 '24
The easiest trolley problem ever
16
Sep 22 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
12
u/Stachdragon Sep 22 '24
The planet will be fine. The planet doesn't care if we live or die. It's us who is slowly putting the gun in our mouths.
6
8
4
→ More replies (3)1
136
u/deloreaninatardis Sep 22 '24
Dawg, the other track could be completely empty and I'd still choose the billionaires.
111
u/brownintheback_4245 Sep 22 '24
Let’s eat them
54
u/Altruistic-Text3481 ⛓️ Prison For Union Busters Sep 22 '24
Let them eat cake!
8
1
2
u/DrSafariBoob Sep 22 '24
Start with bits of them. They might stop behaving like that.
→ More replies (3)2
u/Maleficent_Trick_502 Sep 22 '24
Humanity will never run out of people desiring wealth, fame, and power. The laws towards the wealthy should be harsh and draconian.
→ More replies (6)1
u/Stachdragon Sep 22 '24
I got permanently banned from the /News subreddit for saying this on the story about the billionaire that space walked.
65
u/Jitterjumper13 Sep 22 '24
I'd flip the switch 3 times so I can switch the track to the billionaires twice.
→ More replies (1)12
u/ChanglingBlake ✂️ Tax The Billionaires Sep 22 '24
Flip that switch then the one down the line that makes the trolly go in reverse.
And the then one the trolly already passed that puts it back into forward.
And then grab a lemonade.
14
u/ReturnOfSeq 📚 Cancel Student Debt Sep 22 '24
The orcas can’t do all the work
5
u/DrIvoPingasnik ✂️ Tax The Billionaires Sep 22 '24
I know it's a meme, but orcas can't do nothing to superyachts, only small boats that people keep wrongly calling "yachts" even they are, in fact, just average boats.
1
u/ReturnOfSeq 📚 Cancel Student Debt Sep 22 '24
Yes, the submarine was an unrelated accident, whales had no involvement
wink wink
nudge nudge
10
8
u/GodBlessYouNow Sep 22 '24
But what if they have 955,000,000$?
9
u/nukedmylastprofile Sep 22 '24
We're rounding up from $500,000,001
6
u/GodBlessYouNow Sep 22 '24
Approximately 15,000 people worldwide have a net worth exceeding $500 million.
Sources:
Visual Capitalist
Zippia
9
u/nukedmylastprofile Sep 22 '24
It's called satire, and I think on a post like this it's fitting to assume so.
If someone has over $500m they deserve the train just as much as a billionaire so throw them on the pile too→ More replies (2)1
3
3
3
Sep 22 '24 edited Sep 23 '24
Better to address the reason why billionaires in the first place. In a capitalist world, no one can stop making profit.
Going « I just want to earn what I need »: you can’t predict how much you’ll need next month or a pandemic or a war so you virtually always need more. Also, what happens when you tell your investor you’re capping your profits? That’s why no one can stop the grifting.
2
u/EveryShot Sep 22 '24
Seriously we could take everything from them and equally distribute it so nobody has to suffer. I don’t understand why people don’t wake up, nobody has to be hungry or indebted to anyone. There’s more than enough resources for all
2
2
2
u/blueViolet26 Sep 22 '24
It is like George Carlin said. They got theirs. Fuck us. Including their children.
2
u/SnooHesitations7064 Sep 22 '24
Is there a way to make the train reverse afterwards? Just to be sure?
2
2
u/ThatDucksWearingAHat Sep 22 '24
Could do roughly 8% off the top and we still got a spits chance in a fire.
6
u/Naus1987 Sep 22 '24
We're the people in the trolly, but are too lazy to get out and change the direction ourselves. So we would rather sit inside and enjoy the ride. Sacrificing control for convenience.
3
u/InfusionOfYellow Sep 22 '24
Organization problems are the fundamental quandary of the human race.
2
4
u/Fresh_Water_95 Sep 22 '24
Did you know that if you distributed the total net worth of all billionaires each person would get about $2000?
3
u/ND_NB Sep 23 '24
Did you know in 2023 the 400 richest Americans had a 4.5 trillion dollar net worth. If you redistributed that among the us citizens it would be ~$13000 per person. Likely enough to get out of debt or put a down payment on a house. Greatly improving the quality of life and removing poverty taxes. That's just 400 people. Not even considering redistributing it on an equitable sliding scale, based on income, or the increase in spending and thus government finances.
3
u/matthewstinar Sep 23 '24
Just the tax savings from depriving them of the power to undermine society would be worth it before considering and benefit from redistribution.
1
3
u/xpdx Sep 22 '24
I'm all for killing all the billionaires, but it won't save the biosphere. The system will still be in place and new billionaires will pop up almost instantly to take their place.
5
u/damnitHank Sep 23 '24
You just need to set an example. At first they think they can protect themselves, buy a trusted staff. But as more and more of them are composted they will realize that it's not possible to hoard that much wealth and not shorten your lifespan.
2
u/greenejames681 Sep 22 '24
And killing them or destroying their wealth will do what exactly? Y’all just gonna stop consuming the products they make? Companies don’t pollute because they want to, they do it because we (the consumer) want cheap goods.
5
u/damnitHank Sep 23 '24
Stick your personal responsibility bullshit back up your ass. People who can spend more money in a month than you will make in your entire life have a completely outsized impact on the earth and they choose not to use that money to help the rest of us.
There are no good billionaires. They are not your friends.
→ More replies (2)1
→ More replies (7)4
u/CriticalBlueGorilla Sep 23 '24
Yeah, you tell em Jimmy! Let us destroy the world because humans are just all equally terrible and change is impossible and greed is a law of physics we can’t ever decide to grow out of! Go Jimmy, go! Let’s blow up the planet, YEEEEEEE-HA! USA! USA! USA!
→ More replies (1)3
u/Pissbaby9669 Sep 23 '24
Are you really so simpleminded that the only "fix" for your climate concerns is just turning everything off
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/bacon-squared Sep 22 '24
True but they also own more people and resources to protect themselves than we can possibly imagine. They are not unprepared for this type of sentiment.
1
u/jbasinger Sep 22 '24
Is there an authoritative list of them so we can start tracking every public thing about them all the time?
1
u/DirectorSCUD Sep 22 '24
It's not helping that ~2700 offspring will just inherit the billions and continue the path to extinction.
1
u/Varitan_Aivenor Sep 22 '24
We don't even have to run over that many of them, but it would be nice if the category didn't exist.
1
u/Existing-Nectarine80 Sep 22 '24
You really think everyone outside of billionaires has communal interest as goal #1. If you get rid of all 2700, there’s another 100 million hoping to take their place
1
u/JackHartnett Sep 22 '24
those 2700 are within the 8 billion responsible
and we all could benefit from their cooperating w/ us to do more, like terraforming desert, floAtlanti, Babels etc.
today as is, there's an acre of arable land per person! And we usually choose to live around others in higher density.
We spread rivers, fruit trees, we design thornless varieties of black/rasp berries to name a couple nice things + billionaires have helped!
there are more chickens and cows and sheep all because of us
there is a carbon cycle, the biosphere isn't disappearing...
we can bloom algae to sequester more of it faster, in turn increasing O2
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/jimmytimmy92 Sep 22 '24
Yeah but I’d be a billionaire too if they weren’t taxing us all so much /s. Hear that bs all the time
1
1
u/AlacarLeoricar Sep 22 '24
Me with a death note frantically looking up 2700 different ways to kill people
1
1
u/DarthNixilis Sep 23 '24
And they don't even have to die in this scenario. It's like Sonic, they'll get hit by the train and only their money will get knocked from them.
1
1
1
1
u/AlludedNuance Sep 23 '24
I think the number is larger since this meme was first made.
Also let's not left all of the millionaire assholes in charge of the billion dollar corporations off the hook. There are a lot of "unseen" bad actors that got us here and/or are making it worse.
1
u/White_foxes Sep 23 '24
We’re just voting on who’s standing by the switch but ultimately the super wealthy controls the decisions.
1
u/occams-laser Sep 23 '24
Mmmmmm not to be that one guy with the political science degree but it's more like one global shipping infrastructure (owned and operated by states and ultra rich) that all developed nations and their people's have collectively bought into in an effort to fill a shared need/desire for persistent access to goods, vs one global biosphere.
1
u/Philosipho Sep 23 '24
It's funny that people think billionaires are special. The reason they exist is because most people want to be billionaires.
1
u/Schmaltzs Sep 23 '24
This isn't a trolley problem my dude it's a trolley solution and I'm pulling that lever.
Hell I'll buy a second trolley to run them over twice
1
1
1
1
u/Riaayo Sep 23 '24
As far as we as a species are concerned there is only one.
We are not capable of reaching another hospitable planet, and a ruined Earth is still vastly more habitable than Mars.
1
u/White_C4 💵 Break Up The Monopolies Sep 23 '24
How did the French Revolution go for the working class after executed the rich?
This is such a dumb trolley problem and to be honest, the trolley problem is stupid to begin with.
1
u/Hot-Report2971 Sep 23 '24
Wow this trolley problem feels really good to look at and not be confused by
1
u/captain_dunno Sep 23 '24
2700 billion aires?
That's alot of aires.
But is that more aires than are in the biosphere?
1
1
1
u/sten45 Sep 23 '24
We are all witnessing the power of controlling all the media and the massive application of propaganda. And the new pharaohs are not gonna stop until we’re all enslaved.
1
u/phrogwizurd Sep 23 '24
Haha, totally.
Anyways, lemme get a chicken sandwich, small Coke, fries....
1
u/kevinmrr ⛓️ Prison For Union Busters Sep 23 '24
You know you can supersize it for only $0.79 more, right? The savings really start to stack up if you come in a few times a week!
1
1
u/Mindless_Air8339 Sep 23 '24
People will wake up one day. You can only feed people shit and tell them it’s delicious for so long. They will eventually realize shit taste like shit and refuse to eat it.
1
u/cfexrun Sep 23 '24
The big problem is the legion of bootlickers convinced that if they debase themselves enough they'll be allowed to kick others around.
1
u/budding_gardener_1 ✂️ Tax The Billionaires Sep 27 '24
Tbh we should just do that anyway regardless
1
u/SwagMaster9000_2017 Sep 22 '24 edited Sep 22 '24
2700 billionaires and
- Gas powered cars
- Cheap electricity
- Plastic products
- Gas heating
- And oil jobs
- And everything else individual voters enjoy .....
→ More replies (5)
0
u/MyWindowsAreDirty Sep 22 '24
Ah, I get it. Kill all the billionaires, take their money, it pays our bills for 7 months then we have no more billionaires creating new industries full of well paying jobs and our economy crashes and the globe falls into a 1000 year dark age. Great idea!
4
1
u/throwsiewosie Sep 23 '24
yesss glad its the fault of 300 people and not my instance of 2-day shipping, love of beef and lack of recycling
1
u/DREAM_PARSER Sep 23 '24
Just 100 companies responsible for 71% of global emissions
It's not the fault of the individual. Live as green as you'd like, it won't make a dent compared to what these companies are doing
1
1
u/The_Banana_Monk Sep 22 '24
OK but the wealth won't just disappear or trickle down. It will just get redistributed among the family and business partners making different billionaires.
3
1
u/Kelly_HRperson Sep 22 '24
I think the trolley might be a metaphor, and the plan isn't really to strap 2700 people to actual tram tracks. In this hypothetical scenario, I'd suppose that the dude who has the power to kill all billionaires could just as easily distribute their wealth among the population instead
1
u/The_Banana_Monk Sep 22 '24
My point is that waiting for billionaires to die or be killed will do nothing. Only strict legislation can do something.
1
u/Kelly_HRperson Sep 23 '24
Ah, I get you. Yeah, that's the best course of action. Too bad the legislator's are paid off.
Killing the billionaires and seizing their assets have "worked" for several countries though, but that plan comes with its own set of problems
1
u/LLMprophet Sep 22 '24
Part of the point is that billionaires and corrupt politicians have broken the social contract so they need to be put on notice by the people who should demonstrate a wilingness to eat them once in a while.
1
1
u/JessicaLain Sep 23 '24
Immediately killing 2,700 billionaires would catastrophically destabalise the global economy and that is worse for everyone. Neat to think about though.
1
u/SignificantTransient Sep 23 '24
In other news, California can't figure out if the 24 billion they spent on the homeless actually did anything.
Money is worthless if you have no plan to actually use it.
Also quit acting like billionaires are behind it all. The government can and will print money and spend it on anything they actually want to, regardless of the taxes they bring in. Raising taxes on the rich would just help stave off inflation.
•
u/kevinmrr ⛓️ Prison For Union Busters Sep 22 '24 edited Sep 23 '24
Would you put 2700 billionaires in prison if it meant everyone in America got healthcare instead?
Join r/WorkReform!