• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    411 year ago

    How about we stop calling it their fucking money. It’s inconceivable that someone can look at what has got to be at least 50% of all wealth ever made by humankind and say, “this is mine and just mine”. That isn’t what sane rational people think

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      111 year ago

      Coincidentally, those same 5 are 2024’s “who’s who of sociopathic shitheads”, a title they’ve earned with lifetimes of dedication to the craft

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    321 year ago

    Wait Musk is still such a strong first place? I thought with twitter bombing, people starting to dislike Tesla, general weird behavior, he was losing quite a bit? I’m probably way out of touch but isn’t someone catching uo to him?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      531 year ago

      That’s the neat part. When you’re rich you can make as many mistakes as you want, and you’ll still be rich.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        141 year ago

        Lost more money than anyone ever has ever and is still the richest human alive. Howzat for fucked

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          They don’t even lose money. Those huge figures that keep changing are literally imaginary. For example, let’s say I have company and I make it publicly traded. I keep 100 shares and sell 100 shares for a dollar each. some guy buys 1 then sells it to someone else for $10. Now I have $1000 because each share is valued at $10 now. A few days later some other guys sells his 1 share for $5. Now I have $500 and I’ve lost half my money overnight. And during all this up 1000% down 50% advanture only $115 changed hands. There has never been a 1000 or even 500 dolars.

          If I wanted to sell. my 100 shares when it was 10 a piece I wouldn’t be able to do so, because as soon as I start selling shares on mass it would lose its value. But I can show it as collateral and get credit from a bank. I didn’t create any value but now I have lots of cash. The more I think about it the more pissed of I get.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      151 year ago

      Tesla shares constitute something like 70% of Elon’s total fortune. Twitter is overall not that relevant for his big picture wealth, and weird behavior even less so.

      At the moment Tesla’s stock price is in decline because of competition from China and the overall EV market not growing as fast, so Bezos or somebody else could indeed overtake Musk in the near term. But this could easily change again next month, the stock market is fickle.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        51 year ago

        It so cool that you can buy your way into an existing company that already had talent and an idea, and then become among the richest people in the world…

        Wait sorry, Hard Work™©® yeah… That’s what he did… Hard Work…

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          Oh there was hard work involved. His daddy’s emerald mine money worked very hard to get him where he is. And the slaves in those mines worked very hard to build daddy’s money.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      Divided you beg - the Republican way. United you bargain - the Democrats way. Keep voting Republican and keep making the rich richer.

    • prole
      link
      fedilink
      English
      211 year ago

      And yet the majority of Trump voters will cite it as the reason they’re voting for him.

      People are unredeemingly stupid.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        6
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s not irrational to depend on the economy (as defined by news media) because a good economy does mean a lot of good things for even the lowest level workers. The problem is a good economy means the rich get richer and a bad economy means poor people lose their jobs. There is no consequence for the rich except maybe having to reorganize their investments and lose a marginal amount of their wealth. Whereas in comparison poor people can end up on the streets.

        • prole
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The problem is a good economy means the rich get richer and a bad economy means poor people lose their jobs.

          This mindset right here is the problem.

          No, that is not what a good economy means. That is what you’ve been conditioned to believe is a good economy. That there’s just nothing we can do, and if we want to be anything but poor and homeless, then that means we have to let billionaires (and soon trillionaires) exploit us, and that just isn’t true.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            I don’t disagree but many of us are clinging to what jobs we have and a recession often times means layoffs. So if you like your job there is security knowing that the oligarchs are happy you have less to worry about. Not saying it’s right that it is this way, just the way it is.

    • fmstrat
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s put very simply here:

      The world’s five richest men have more than doubled their fortunes to $869bn (£681.5bn) since 2020, while the world’s poorest 60% – almost 5 billion people – have lost money.

      … the world’s billionaires were $3.3tn (£2.6tn) richer than in 2020, and their wealth had grown three times faster than the rate of inflation.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    31 year ago

    Well, when the TSHTF they’ll die just like the rest of us trapped on the globe, cooked and starving thanks to the climate.

  • Nacktmull
    link
    fedilink
    271 year ago

    Just capitalism working as intended, nothing to see here, please keep walking.

  • Ghostalmedia
    link
    fedilink
    English
    451 year ago

    I’m sure electing a billionaire will fix things right up in the US.

  • bedrooms
    link
    fedilink
    28
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Rich assets grow exponentially. They will exceed government budgets if they haven’t yet. Then, they will have far bigger budget than governments.

    Maybe the world will all become North Korea.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      7
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This is from 2021 so remember that the biggest boxes there need to be twice as big now. Your box, however, is the same size or smaller.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21 year ago

      And just think that the article said this decade we’re expecting to have our first trillionaire. That’d be a hell of a lot more scrolling.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      351 year ago

      This is such a good visualization of big numbers and big bank accounts.

      It’s also a good way to really see the bull shit argument that it’s unfair to tax the wealthy at a higher rate. Even if they get taxed at 90% (which I don’t think will happen in my lifetime) they still will have enough money for them and their decedents to live a lavish lifestyle. And that extra money could really make America into the country that it pretends to be.

      • prole
        link
        fedilink
        English
        14
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Also, the “taxed at 90%” is a red herring too, since that’s not how progressive tax brackets work. Nobody’s effective tax rate would be close to 90%, even if we raised the top marginal rate to nearly 100%.

        • @[email protected]OP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          If tax brackets were sensibly set, with a >90% rate for the top bracket, these people would still be very wealthy but the amount given to tax would be almost all of their wealth, since the highest tax bracket would kick in just a few pixels into the giant boxes on that diagram. And there would be nothing wrong with that.

          • prole
            link
            fedilink
            English
            41 year ago

            Right. If they were sensible. But I’m OK with taking it one step at a time and ease into it so it doesn’t immediately get shut down.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          3
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          That’s why taxing net worth is our next step. Make it a sigmoid curve that starts out at $10M and hits 100% taxation at $100M.

          And yes, plenty of things can be “valued”. The Insurance industry has plenty of experience at this, as do branches of the government that estimate property values so cities can levy property taxes, and banks that extend loans to billionaires on the basis of securities being held.

          If companies can attach dollar values to the lives that they destroyed due to OSHA/labour violations, then a taxable value can be assigned to pretty much anything a card-carrying member or the Parasite Class might own, or holds through a shell corp, holding company, or trust.