849
World’s five richest men double their money as poorest get poorer
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2024
849 points (99.1% liked)
News
23376 readers
2824 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
There's very little we can do. Even the 'eat the rich' idea isn't very viable since they can hide in their nuclear war protection bunkers surrounded by armed security.
Cool they can be buried in their tombs and we can just get back to ignoring their existence. Sounds like a win actually.
Sure, after their security people slaughter everyone who sends them in there. Are you willing to face down a bunch of machine guns fired by well-trained mercenaries in heavy armor? Do you think Zuckerberg has any less in his Hawaii survival bunker?
Why do we need in their bunker? Seriously let's just scare them in there watch them seal the doors and then push a boulder onto their vents and doorways.
Boom modern pharaohs buried with all their wealth and followers and then we can just garden up here. Why do we need anything in their bunker unless they end their world with themselves in which case ok it's all over.
I see nothing wrong with the wealthy locking themselves in a box in the ground and leaving the whole world to the rest of us.
I'm just worried about who they'll kill on their way to the box.
No need, we live in an era of drone warfare. Human soldiers aren't even in the top 50% of most effective combat units anymore. Armed security is all good and well but a machinegun emplacement isn't going to do a whole lot about 500 incoming quadcopters carrying thermite payloads. You don't even need to destroy the whole bunker, just the entrance, then roll up a couple of Caterpillars and put them under a 12 foot dirt hill. And if the drones don't cut it, say the compound has EM shielding of some sort that causes them to stop functioning (a feature that many modern actual militaries don't even have), a private plane shoveling a couple hundred pounds of explosives out of its cargo storage from cruising altitude would probably be a suitable replacement.
No compound of any sort is infinitely defensible from superior numbers. Zuck/Musk/Bezos/Etc may be rich but their reach is not limitless. Just like how civilians aren't going to want to rush down a mercenary emplacement, pretty soon all the available mercenary forces are going to be thinking twice about signing on to defend a compound where disposable drones like to drop random pipe bombs from the sky every other day.
In an end of the world scenario, where safety exists only inside the bunkers, the bunkers will fall, and swiftly. In a scenario where safety does exist outside the bunkers but everything generally sucks, and the Rich inside the bunkers are still able to be seen or have news posted about them, the bunkers will fall eventually. In a scenario where the Rich disappear into the bunkers and are never heard from again, fuck 'em, mission accomplished, we don't even need to raid the tombs.