• AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    And remember, because I feel this always needs to be said with such sums…

    193 million isn’t enough for him, and 193 million plus whatever millions he made in years prior isn’t enough for him. He’s going public because he’s a broken, disturbed human being that looks at his unethical levels of wealth, enough for most of the other humans that live here to live 2 dozen extravagant lifetimes, and still demands mooooooaaaaaar.

    Why isn’t this widely accepted as severe mental illness?! This is hoarding disorder.

    These aren’t big ocean house sums. These are buying politicians sums, and they are only achievable through exploiting other human beings and selfishly pocketing most of the value of their labor because you can get away with it.

    • positiveWHAT@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Is it possible to set a roof on private wealth? Everything above put into public funds? Give them a “you win at capitalism” trophy and let them into some other game to play.

      • oce 🐆@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I think the absence of cap also makes super rich people motivated to invest in new projects that could make them even richer. If they don’t have this motivation anymore, it may reduce this investment source, they’d just keep what they have and don’t see the point in doing more with their money. Would the state do that better from taxes money? Maybe

        • positiveWHAT@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          But that means they seek projects that must be profitable and that’s exactly why I want the bloated investment power off their hands and into public projects that value psyche and society in the long run. Profit seeking leads to sick companies like Apple etc. with stances like “the customer should not be able to repair their shit”.

          • oce 🐆@jlai.lu
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I think better regulation of the market so it benefits the consumers, like what EU tries to do, is more realistic than imagining a state being able to sustainably handle marketable innovation. I don’t think a state would have come out with efficient web search, smartphones or gen AI for exemple.