Yes, I am being lazy because I read books, provide arguments, and get responses like "LOL no u are wrong! Idiot!"
Why would I spend more than 2 minutes replying to that when it's clear they've spent no time thinking through their response and I can easily show they're wrong?
I get it though, if you don't have an argument then attack the person for being lazy. Ad hominem attacks are good at changing the topic. But I am still right at end of day.
I agree that they do get there by exploiting people sure.
Is there a difference between someone like Jeff bezos and Bill Gates though? If you say no then I can't help you. If you can see the difference then we can continue the discussion because exploiting people at one stage in your life and then trying to make up for it later is inherently good in my opinion.
Put another way, do you think once you're a criminal you're always a criminal? There is no chance of redemption and of being a good person?
You have some of the worst nations in the world failing and mass murdering their citizens due to communism/socialism and you can't see that.
Can you seriously say you'd want to live in a country like a Russia VS most other capitalist countries? Do you honestly not read or understand anything about how awful those systems are?
Here you go since you have no idea what you're talking about from chatgpt and I'm lazy:
Yes, one of the themes of Les Misérables is that criminals can be redeemed. The novel shows how Jean Valjean, a former convict who spent 19 years in prison for stealing a loaf of bread, is able to change his life and become a good person after he receives kindness and forgiveness from a bishop. He then devotes himself to helping others, such as Fantine, Cosette, Marius, and even Javert, his former enemy. The novel suggests that redemption is possible for anyone who is willing to repent and love, and that society should not judge people based on their past mistakes, but rather on their present actions and intentions.
Which is exactly my point... So thanks for showing your ignorance.
But yes, full communism is insane. I am not interested in creating worse systems that are fundamentally broken. I honestly don't know if you're trolling or just uneducated, but have you not seen Russia? Because that is what happens with communism.
No, it's not that they failed to implement it, it's because it's a fundamentally flawed system that always fails.
Jesus Chris, if you think a socialist/communist party is anything but terrible you need to look at history.
It's a great idea but it's fundamentally flawed and corrupt. Please read some books.
And no, don't twist my words into saying that we are dependent on billionaires. But pretending they're bad and are all evil/can't be part of a solution shows very poor critical thinking skills.
The claims that he has raped children is completely unsubstantiated and is just attacking his character. If there was evidence great. But one ride on a plane is hardly strong evidence.
Have you ever watched or heard of les miserable? I suggest you watch/read it, because yes - people can murder, steal, rape Etc. And that doesn't mean that they're an awful person for life. I'm sure you've severely hurt people in your life, are you unreedemable because of those few times?
The argument of more harm VS more good is interesting. I personally don't see it and it would be super hard to substantiate. Having a successful company/monopoly is not in itself bad.
And if billionaires are bad, you could make the argument that Bill Gates stopped another billionaire from taking the helm, so he actually stopped a billionaire which makes him good. It's all circular bullshit regardless, but until you can show some strong evidence of the wrong he's done its far easier for me to show you the good.
People change, and there is a difference between doing charitable work later in life VS not doing any charitable work at all.
If you take a completely utilitarian view, you'd actually argue you need to become a billionaire in order to become charitable at a significant level because realistically at an individual level you're going to do fuck all.
No offence, but this sort of extremist view is no different to an extremist right wing view. Replace "billionaires" with "poor people" and you get the same result.
It's unrealistic and it's wrong and the arguments made are pretty shallow and cherry picked.
Thanks for the video, but the guy nitpicks a lot of things and tries to character assassinate Bill Gates a fair bit on not really relevant things. I get he has to sensationalise it for more views, but it was a pretty weak argument.
Ultimately for a solution everyone needs to be realistic and work with how the world happens. Asking to remove all billionaires is cute but what I'd expect of a 12 year old trying to solve world issues. Bill Gates isn't perfect but he's a good start and example. Compare him to Jeff bezos or Elon Musk who are just massive fuckwits doing nothing for the planet for example and maybe you'll understand.
Otherwise, if you really think they're all equal then I can't help you out of your own biases.
Yes, once you're a bad person you're always a bad person.
Again, it's statements like this which are just ridiculous. People change and if you think Bill Gates is doing a shitty/bad thing then we're fucked because of the lot he's by far the most charitable and looking to make the world better.
He's certainly done more than you or most people on the planet have done to help.
It's frustrating how easy boomers had it yet how many still seemed to screw up their finances. I am significantly more financially literate than many I know yet I will never see the stupid returns they did on things.
Yeah, there's some heavy hopium in this discussion. "What if Linux has exponential growth forever, 40% every quarter?" type garbage.