The best way a billionaire could spend their money is to lobby politicians to tax the rich.
Ah yes, the liberal solution that never works and is always temporary and doesn't account for literally any systems of power.
Can you expand on this? I don't understand your argument
I've never liked how the pyramid is arranged, as if the ones on top are living the 'right' way, or are 'better' somehow.
It should be the other way around, with 8 billion people hanging to a ledge, trying to improve the state of the world, while roughly 6.5k are throwing a tantrum, desperately clinging to the ankles of the masses, threatening to drag everything into the void if they can't get their way.
I mean you just made another metaphor but it's more weird and doesn't work
It's not "higher = better" but the level above suppresses / deceives the level below. And the higher up you go, the fewer people inhabit a level.
as if the ones on top are living the 'right' way, or are 'better' somehow.
Media literacy at an all time low. How on earth do you come to the conclusion that the people sitting on platforms literally weighing down on the lower classes are supposed to be better?
Billionaires simply cannot exist without their money coming from the exploitation of the "lower classes"
Over many generations
But they won't drive you to become homeless and stop paying you.
No capitalist can. It’s definitional to the system.
100% tax for money after $500 Million. Also, tax corporations the full salary of the worker that is replaced by AI/automation/robotics to fund universal basic income.
Start a little earlier, personal income above 10 million gets a 90% tax without loopholes, and no tax until the cost of living (At least until the government sorts out universal basic needs.)
I like the later part.
Financial obesity is an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.
Corporations are the only ‘persons’ which should be subjected to capital punishment, but billionaires should be euthanised through taxation.
Financial obesity makes it seem like it’s the same as being fat, which doesn’t make sense because being fat is not a specific problem in the same way that being rich is.
I’m sure you just mean it like “fat cat” but it’s a bizarre way to phrase it since it isn’t a good analogy.
I agree. My real abhorrence, however, is for the countless bootlickers who themselves live in near poverty yet loudly support their overlords in a sycophantic and unquestioning fashion. These class traitors, masquerading as real Americans are as culpable as the mentally deranged hoarders they prop up.
I don't feel like there's a way to get through to these sheep-like collaborators, so it's difficult to imagine anything will change in the near future.
For fuck sake, can you keep your fatphobia out of things for five minutes?!
Calm down, fatty
Think about it. Many of them have enough money to end world hunger, build affordable housing, give healthcare to a poor country, etc. But they choose not to. All evil is an active choice.
They mostly just choose to go to Epstein island it seems
taylor isnt one of the good ones, she just had good pr, up until she started partying with magat influencer.
Very true, she only had a career because her dad bought a record deal for her.
Now, the best producers are writing sabrina carpenter's songs (as she'll be made into the next big thing) instead of Swift's and the quality of writing, such as it was, has plummeted.
Her old record label will now look to bring her down, to bring her fans over to their new projects and the wheel keeps turning until the next one. It's not a coincidence that bad PR suddenly happens to an act after their record deal comes to an end.
she always seemed a country conservative leaning too me, immediately queit about trump stealing her song considering she is extremely litigious, bashing other people about her extensive private jet usage. her "marrying" Kelce seemed all staged, even the taylor/kelce subreddit is clowning on her, and criticizing her.
No, but they can and will bribe their way to ensure that there are more and more of those in the first image so they can have more and more of what makes the second image.
Itt:
Both are equally wrong. Homelessness has a great many causes and some people would struggle even with a home due to disorder that had them become homeless. It isn't just a money issue.
The way Denmark and Sweden tackle the problem very successfully shows that combating homelessness is largely an issue of the right social policies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_Finland And it actually saves money too
Sure, simply providing housing may not solve everything, and complex measures must be taken to ensure mental wellbeing, fiscal responsibility, lack of addictions etc.
But housing and income must come first, as not having that prevents effective therapy. When you're in survival mode, you're not particularly productive resolving your other issues.
Yes, everyone should have housing. But you do need assistance programs to help with the trauma and underlying causes.
Absolutely. Not housing only, but housing first. The rest should come as well.
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
