• SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Getting some Pol Pot vibes from this. Ideology can lead to some really weird conclusions.

    Somone like Taylor Swift isn’t destroying people’s lives and she’s not overworking other people to make that money.

    Sure she has too much money, but that can be solved by having more sensible tax policies. Show me where she’s bribing congress and donating to the GOP to keep her taxes low.

    These kinds of memes only exist to prove how edgy people are but they don’t accomplish anything. Saying “I’m so hardcore I even hate the billionaires people like” doesn’t do anything other than push people away from whatever movement you claim to support.

    But congratulations, you’re the edgiest socialist edge lord on the internet. That sound you hear is the Swifties (who might otherwise care about the issues you care about) heading towards the door.

    People like Elon Musk and Donald Trump divide people so they don’t think about what they’re doing. You’re helping them.

    • _cryptagion [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      If people criticizing your favorite celebrity makes you stop caring about social issues, then you never really cared about those issues in the first place to begin with.

    • xaxyg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      But congratulations, you’re the edgiest socialist edge lord on the internet.

      Oooh, look at me I’m a contrarian.

      I find popular threads and look at which way majority sentiment is going
      and then I take the opposing side and call everyone edgelords and sheeple.
      I am very smart…I’m a contrarian.

      If you pass by a car accident, no one else is around and don’t stop to help
      and the person would have lived if you stopped but instead that person dies then
      yes, you are evil. You don’t have to be “actively evil” you can be “passively evil”

      That’s what the billionaires are doing to the world. Mass wealth hoarding is gluttonous
      and it is evil when extreme poverty exists.

      • Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        and don’t stop to help and the person would have lived if you stopped but instead that person dies then yes, you are evil

        Also that’s actually a crime in many places. Well here in Finland at least. You have a duty to render aid if no-one else is there. Obviously you can just drive by an accident if someone is already helping but if there’s no-one else around, you’re required to stop to help, by law.

    • rational_lib@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      These kinds of memes only exist to prove how edgy people are but they don’t accomplish anything. Saying “I’m so hardcore I even hate the billionaires people like” doesn’t do anything other than push people away from whatever movement you claim to support.

      So true. Learn from the edgy George Floyd protests and the Palestine protests, which at best accomplished nothing and more likely played a key role in cutting off formerly-rising popular support for the causes they were advocating. Being edgy feels good to the person doing it, but it makes everyone else say “fuck that guy and whatever they’re in favor of.” Be smart not angry.

      These meme would be far more effective if it didn’t have the bottom picture at all.

        • rational_lib@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Such a normie reaction. I just wanna differentiate myself from all the NPCs who have let ideology replace their reasoning capabilities, as well as “rational centrists” who consider conceding to irrational Republican arguments to be a form of rationalty. If I’ve said something irrational, you can feel free to call me out on it. My username is an invitation to do just that.

          • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            “I’m a rational person, and as a rational person I think it’s normal to dismiss people with opinions I don’t like as unthinking automations because it’s impossible for me to consider that someone else might legitimately disagree with me.”

            • rational_lib@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Except I am careful with this. It would be a valid criticism if the opinion I don’t like wasn’t “lol at rational lib”. That is fairly described as an NPC opinion, unless you care to help justify it as something deeper. Rationality is not concession, bad opinions should be called out as such. And by the way, it’s not just people I disagree with - after all, this whole thread is me criticizing people who agree with me that billionaire wealth is out of control for choosing shitty argument tactics.

              • _cryptagion [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                The only people who use the term “NPC” or “normie” are those who realize they aren’t special, and detest that fact. That you’ve used those terms, and have called yourself “rational lib”, tells me you’re male, lonely, and dealing with subconscious feelings of inadequacy that you can only deal with by dehumanizing other people.

                I’m sorry I made fun of you, and I hope you end up getting help.

                • rational_lib@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Don’t be sorry, be self-aware. You can look up my comment history, I don’t use this kind of language with everyone, but when in Trollistan, I speak troll.

                  As far as the Dr. Phil stuff, you’re describing a typical Lemmy user. Of course I’m male, only had about 98% odds with that one. Am I lonely? Occasionally, but less than most. Not that there’s anything wrong with being lonely, which is a very common emotion even among popular people. Subconscious feelings of inadequacy are references to psychoanalytic concepts that have long since been debunked. Dehumanizing? Quite the opposite. I’m trying to persuade the online masses to free themselves from the automated thought process of ideology.

                • rational_lib@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  That is fairly described as an NPC opinion

                  bad opinions should be called out as such

                  The who pronoun is entirely inappropriate here

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Which world do you live in? People voted for Donald Trump, a guy who wanted to shoot BLM protestors and says he’ll let Israel do whatever they want.

        The edgelord bullshit only makes you popular with people that agree with you. It has demonstrably failed to bring people to the causes you care about.

    • Dasus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      The point isn’t “Taylor Swift is immoral”. The point is “the system is immoral and the evidence for it can be seen by looking at, for instance, Taylor Swift.”

      Being against billionaires doesn’t mean one is genocidal ffs.

      People like Elon Musk and Donald Trump divide people so they don’t think about what they’re doing. You’re helping them.

      No U, bootlicker.

      • bss03@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        “Kill all billionaires” isn’t a genocidal statement, since it’s not based on genetics, language, or culture.

        I think it’s a bad plan, but we shouldn’t conflate genocide with mere mass murderous intent. (Also, “all billionaires” is only like 10k people at most, so it would be a very small mass murder compared to most genocides.)

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I wouldn’t call her a good billionaire, but I think she’s as benign as billionaires get. At least she does things like pay her employees a good wage and gets people involved in the political process.

    And, as far as I know, she isn’t responsible for anyone’s deaths.

    I’m sure she still stepped on a lot of necks up the pyramid, but compared to a shit ton of other billionaires out there…

    • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      The thing with TS is that she is not supposed to be like other billionaires. Other billionaires, most of them, have a different motivation, this is, to make more money. They are supposed to be entrepreneurs but at that level they are more like gamblers. TS is supposed to be an artist and her motivation is supposed to provoke a reaction in people’s emotions through her craft, which is making songs. Hell, at this point she could be singing and composing for free and giving away money. She could just license her next album to some cause, like fighting against cancer, and just let them use the gainings to fight cancer. That’s why I don’t even give her words my attention, she demonstrated that her motivation seems to become richer and richer, as any other billionaire she has all the attention she wants and more, because in the end she is like any other billionaire, a hoarder forgetting about the importance of other people’s lives.

    • DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Billionaires can’t be benign. It’s impossible to make a billion dollars in a lifetime without taking more than you deserve. Someone overpaid for the product or someone was underpaid for the work (probably both). Billionaires prey on that loss, and it’s not as if they are Robin Hood giving back to the poor. If that’s not malignant, I don’t know what is.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        “As benign as billionaires get” and “benign” are not the same thing. See also the “I’m sure she still stepped on a lot of necks up the pyramid” part.

        Why do you think I said benign and not what I actually said?

      • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Critical Role may not be billionaires but they are proof you can make a fuck ton of money without being shitty. Yes it’s one example but your language was pretty absolute.

    • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’d settle for “less bad”. If Musk is a 10/10, she’s an easy 4/10, with the ranking based entirely on arbitrary numbers and few actual facts.

  • spujb@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Hi, Swiftie here 🙋‍♀️

    There are no good billionaires. Taylor Swift is not a good person due to her business practices. I have no defense of her and I would never say “she is one of the good ones.” I and most of the Swiftie circles I run in wish that she would practice equitable compensation in her tours (where she gets the vast majority of her profit), among other areas.

    Taylor Swift is a capitalist, and that’s bad. There are thousands of artists and laborers being exploited by her every performance. All those laborers, stage hands, designers, arena staff, etc should have a say in how the massive revenue generated is distributed, and they do not get that say. That is bad.

    As a majority male space, Lemmy has a tendency to slide a bit toward dunking on women and majority women’s spaces because you may not be aware that many leftist Swifties are just as critical of Swift as other billionaires. This post is a good example of that. (If you feel bad or called out by this, don’t stress it. I just want to gently course correct the conversation a tad 🙂)

      • spujb@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        to reiterate: i’m not alone :) my positions mirror a ton of other swifties’ (obviously not all, but you do what you can)—they just have limited representation on lemmy due to gender and vibes

      • kcfb@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I feel the reason she is being used as an example isn’t because she’s a female billionaire, but because she is a billionaire who receives adoration. The meme points out that even the “good ones” shouldn’t be billionaires.

        • moral_quandary@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          I feel the reason she is being used as an example

          Rihanna is right there in the same picture and not a single person is commenting on her.

          I don’t think she is being used as an example - I think people hyper-focused on the image of her
          and don’t understand “no good billionaires” means not a single one - not Swift, not Rihanna, not Jay-Z,
          not Selena Gomez, not George Lucas, etc…

    • voldage@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      How do you reconcile the understanding of her not being a good person and doing harm to the world with being a Swiftie? That’s a genuine question, I find identifying with the group supporting or admiring the person or idea I myself am opposed to on the ideological level hard to imagine. I can understand it being the case if one is defending the lesser evil, as they are coerced to do so by implied existence of the greater evil, but while I’m not well versed in the Swift lore I believe there isn’t any evil twin running around that she needs to stop. Unless.

      That’s not an attack, I believe that being a Swiftie might mean something else than what I understand by this term and I am making a fool out of myself. Still, it does seem to mean supporting what you’re opposed to. How do you resolve that contradiction?

      • spujb@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Thanks for your question! It’s a good one.

        Short answer: I don’t

        Long answer: @[email protected] explains it super well so I won’t rewrite their excellent comment: https://lemmy.cafe/post/10463918/8811775

        Parallel example but chronically fandom answer: Swift has also made a lot of really shitty decisions regarding relationships that I strongly dislike, including dating freak weirdo misogynist Matty Healy. 🫤 I don’t think we could ever be friends, or whatever, because of these flaws to her character. I don’t try to reconcile her flaws at all. I just like most of her music a lot and keep myself honest about the rest of it. 🤷‍♀️

    • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’m not a swiftie, and I’m male, so take my words as you will in that context.

      Simply: IMO, it is possible to appreciate someones artistry while disliking their personal value system and actions.

      Just because someone is a good artist, does not and should not imply that they are good.

      Both liking someone’s music and disliking their decisions as a person, can both be true. I hate the plethora of false dichotomy arguments that you can’t appreciate music made by a person if that person is considered a bad person. One does not mean the other cannot be true.

      • lunarul@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I do agree with separating the artist from the art, but I also understand choosing to not support people whose values you disagree with. Because your money will end up being used to support those values.

        So yes, I won’t say that I don’t like certain songs/books/paintings/etc. because of the artist, but I can refuse to pay for them or other related merchandise.

        • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          That’s fair. You can like something but refuse to support it.

          I’m mainly taking issue with anyone who says that if you don’t like the artist, you can’t appreciate the art. I’ve heard it a few times (or some variation of it), and IMO, that’s far too common already.

      • lad@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        false dichotomy arguments that you can’t appreciate music made by a person if that person is considered a bad person

        For me this is more about making someone more popular and making them profits by listening to their music. And then there’s also a possibility that someone is considered a bad person for their views that are also displayed in their music, then I consider that I might start viewing their opinion as the norm, and also prefer not to listen to them.

        All in all, I agree that the dichotomy is false, but I think it has some sense in some cases.

        • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          There’s definitely logic behind wanting to boycott their art so that you are not indirectly supporting their decisions by giving them the money to continue to do the things that they’re doing.

          Of course, that is also a separate decision from whether you like the art or whether you like the artist.

          Anyone trying to tie these things together is generally not someone I would want to associate with.

      • spujb@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        i appreciate you leaving the feedback! sometimes i feel like what i say lands on deaf ears so it’s reassuring that my experience can actually get out there :) cheers

  • beefbot@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Posting women as the targets is such easy pickings and it’s so fuckin lazy. Where’s the white guys? Why aren’t they the face of this, since they’re the hand choking the poor?

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      You’re missing the point. The point is that people always defend TS because they like her but she is still a billionaire. You can’t just snap your fingers and turn this into a conversation about sexism because that’s not related to the point in the least.

      • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        As someone else pointed out a while ago, Dolly Parton isn’t a billionaire because she tirelessly gives away her wealth to the poor.

        It’s not the same level, but there are other musicians who have fought to keep ticket price affordable for their fans, Minor Threat/Fugazi being the most notable but far from the only ones.

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Yeah and there probably is a gender cultural component to Dolly being so kind. But to the commenter I am responding to, I stand by what I said.

        • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          So… The endgame here is that billionaires CAN exist, but any of them who don’t give away their wealth are assholes? So are we all here on these posts just to peer pressure billionaires to give away money?

          That’s certainly going to be a helpful approach.

          • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Essentially yes. The ethical thing to do with that amount of money is to redistribute it to people that need it more. Whether that is by donation to charity, or raising wages and investing in worker protections in the company that you run, or funding schools and development in places that need them, or paying your fair share of taxes, emphasis here because most billionaires got that way by lobbying tax code in their favor - they’ve reached a level of net worth that genuinely boggles the mind and couldn’t be wasted in full in a dozen lifetimes if you tried to.

            I’m fine with people being wealthy, keep a million in your bank account, hell keep ten million, I don’t care. But there needs to be a line somewhere. There needs to be a point where we can say, okay, well done, you have Won At Capitalism. Here is your medal. All further profits are taxed at 99% income. We cannot let individuals amass so much of the supply of money that the nation can no longer support itself, which is what’s happening. Money is the life blood of society and all that blood is being concentrated in particular spots, starving the rest of the body. Money needs to flow to create a healthy economy, but it’s stagnating.

            • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              I don’t fundamentally disagree with you. I would contend that the problem is not that billionaires exist, it’s that there is a legal path to becoming a billionaire.

              This post is a combo shame of other poors like us who like a product generated by a billionaire and a yell at the sky because TS (and whoever the other person was) aren’t reading it anyway. You can be mad at billionaires who sit on their hoard and don’t give it to society for free, or we can all say enough is enough and make it a call to action to DO something. Like vote and participate in government for example.

      • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        You also can’t snap your fingers and take everyone off the street. Sure, you can pay for places and help, but people aren’t obliged to take it. Unless you’re arguing for forcing that situation?

        I understand the argument is simply “billionaires shouldn’t exist”, but that’s a job for the government by way of taxation. There’s no reason to point fingers at TS, she sells something people want really bad for some reason. Instead, point your finger at any of your asshole friends who don’t vote or show up to help the cause.

        Otherwise what? TS sucks because she’s disgustingly rich, and the only way out is to give it all away? And then of course all other billionaires will follow suit?

        These posts really seem like nothing more than “it’s cathartic to yell at the sky, and it’s even better if some people like the sky”.

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Man, sometimes people have a point even if other points exist. The point is that it’s a bad thing to ignore one example of badness because you want to. If you wanna paint this as a moral judgement of TS, ok fine, but my issue here isn’t so much with her but with people who want to have exceptions to their own moral code. And yes that moral code in this case is the job of the government.

  • orcrist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I totally agree, but also the pop star billionaires are the least offensive type. If you’re targeting them before the other billionaires, you got played and are doing it wrong. The richest most politically powerful billionaires are the biggest threat to freedom.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      To me this is the silliest possible counter propaganda. They want to get people fired up about a super popular billionaire that actually works really hard and over pays her people. So then they can paint a picture of radicals who’d have everyone living in the slums no matter what they were able to do with their talents. They won’t even wait to see the real responses. They’ll put their own in, grab the screen cap and deride us all as anarchists.

    • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Pop stars are just the pretty faces in front of the behemoths that are the music labels. These labels are absolutely very politically powerful. Do you think Taylor Swift for rich by paying her staff fair salaries? The cleaning people from the concert venues, the bartenders, the people taking your tickets, etc, they all earned little crumbs while Swift, the venue, and the label made the big bucks.

      No one becomes a billionaire by paying fair wages.

    • Skeezix@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      See that picture of the homeless man on top? Bill Gates has literally saved hundreds of thousands of men like him through his charitable foundations. It depends on the person not the size of the bank account.

      • JargonWagon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Agreed. Any downvotes you got/get are simple shills of the mindsets “rich people bad” and “Windows bad”, both of which are very prevalent here. Multiple people here (not all) throwing those downvotes around would be doing the same shit if they were billionaires, or worse.

        Wish we could all be like Pepe.

        • Skeezix@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          That wouldn’t help, as they wouldn’t have the means to furnish it or maintain it or pay the taxes on it. What they need is medical care for the sizeable portion that have mental illness keeping them down. And all of them need an economic system that doesn’t let hard luck cases get thrown under the bus.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            You wouldn’t believe how many of them have jobs and just need a house. It’s the majority actually.

    • stinky@redlemmy.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      ^ This right here.

      I’m so tired of “leftists” focusing on inoffensive targets in the middle of the spectrum when the real problem is far to the right of it.

    • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Idk, when you move from normal wealth to exorbitant wealth AND you’re a international pop star who very clearly has THOUSANDS of workers supporting each show it seems kinda hard to ignore the people who’s work is providing your stage to excess.

      They all are a symptom of the same disease, some of them are the disease as well.

      • Sam_Bass@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Not all of them. i wouldn’t call buying a concert ticket exploitation. Pricing them to astronomical heights, yeah. The only person responsible for parting with their moneys is the Self.

        • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          This comes up a lot. While Swift might not be able to control concert ticket prices as a whole, she certainly has the influence to make it better. She’s a literal billionaire with a very devout following.

          If anyone could hold a concert at a non-ticketmaster venue, it’s her.

          If anyone could pay her staff quintuple the going rate, it’s her.

          If anyone could lobby cities that hold her concerts accountable for how they treat homeless people, it’s her.

          I love Taylor Swift as much as the next person, but she has blood on her hands just like every billionaire. She may be one of the “good” ones but if anyone could afford to do better, it’s her.

                • rishado@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Are you like a boomer that can’t understand you’re not talking to the same person with every comment? You know lemmy is the whole forum, not a user you’re replying to right?

  • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    There may not be good ones, but like everything there are different grades.

    Someone who became a billionaire selling weapons to conflict zones after pushing them into conflict is a lot worse than an artist that is popular and actually works for their riches.

    • sparr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      That person was already evil before they became a billionaire.

      The amount of evilness from being a billionaire, separate from how they got there, is approximately the same for both of them.

      Nobody “works for” a billion dollars.

    • Belgdore@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yeah, and every day they don’t give back and horde more than they could ever spend, the more evil they are.

  • anticurrent@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Those billionaires are being propped by stupid people buying exorbitant ticket prices to see their idols dancing from a mile a way. I blame the populace for this. you can make them irrelevant without even spending a penny.

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      This being said on the same platform that basically every third person believes voters aren’t responsible for their votes.

      We can always assume people will be stupid, so I don’t think they’re gonna all stop wasting their money. Even if half of them did TS would still be a billionaire

      • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        If every single one of Taylor Swift’s concerts were free, past, present, and future, she’d still probably be a billionaire. Artists don’t really make that much on ticket sales, the ticket vendors and venues are the ones making all the money. Swift’s net worth mostly comes from the value of the rights to her songs, not ticket sales.

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          I think you would be right in a lot of cases but does that apply when you routinely sell out these extremely expensive shows like are being discussed here?

    • spujb@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      In the face of exploitative capital, blaming the consumer is on the same tier of nonsensical rhetoric as victim blaming.

      It’s not the fault of people buying bottled water for Nestle’s human rights violations, nor is it the fans’ fault that Swift’s business model is exploitative and nonethical.

      • anticurrent@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        You are telling me you can’t live without going to a Taylor Swift concert. Capitalism is the origin of many pains, but this one isn’t one of them.

  • saneekav@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    You live on a farm and one day a stray dog shows up. It looks like this: starving dog pic

    You decide not to feed it because it’s not your dog - it’s not your problem.
    But your whole house is completely stocked with food. You throw out large amounts
    of table scraps and leftovers daily.

    How many people would consider that to be evil?

    It’s not about the behavior and character of one billionaire over another.
    It’s the DOING NOTHING while HOARDING MONEY that is the issue.

    No one can argue that $50 million isn’t enough to live a fabulous life.
    Yet, many want to argue that 1,000 million (1 billion) or more is fine
    as long as that person worked hard and didn’t step on people to get it.

    A billionaire is simply not a good person even if he or she does nothing.

    • Artemis_Mystique@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      You decide not to feed it because it’s not your dog - it’s not your problem. But your whole house is completely stocked with food. You throw out large amounts of table scraps and leftovers daily.

      How many people would consider that to be evil?

      Internally the person can justify his actions “You feed a stray dog one time, it will nag you forever, maybe call up his buddies because there is free food, and now suddenly you have a pack of stray dogs on your farm that are causing all sorts of trouble”. Such nuances are always present(I will stop with the dog analogy, because your original example and my addendum, dehumanizes people in need to dogs). but such is the harsh reality, that often arises with a direct personal transfer of wealth, people tend to form a dependency on the table scraps and those that provide them(even though they are losing literally nothing) resent it.

      The solution you may ask to greedy billionaires and hungry homeless people, SOCIETAL or GOVERNMENTAL INTERVENTION, think about it, its the failure of whoever the fuck is in charge that a select few of their citizens have exploited the system so well that their wastage is equivalent to the GDP of a small country, and similarly there are many people that only dream of a roof over their heads!!

    • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      You throw out large amounts of table scraps and leftovers daily.

      But of course you make sure to poison them so the dog can’t eat it

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I know how to fix the economy!

    After 1 million, you win at life so you can stop working and get a basic income with food included, housing, etc. You won, you don’t get to play anymore. No w2 forms or banking or anything. If you buy something, the government just makes the funny money to pay for that which then means more jobs for those still playing the games. Big projects and big companies all public owned and only players get to work there and decide. Anyone who reaches the 1 Million mark gets kicked out into permanent retirement. Once you reach this level you get a party and you can invite anyone you want.

    One benefit of winning is that you can be completely naked the entire time. Because why not. At your party you can request everyone to be naked too.

    You can be married to a winner but you must keep working until you reach the 1million mark.

    That’s it!

    • cheezewiz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      What if I want to build a rocket or iPhone or supercomputer or cancer therapy and I need more than $1 million for parts and labor?

  • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Ok so what, posts like this are to shame billionaires into giving their money away because if they don’t you will call them pieces of shit?

    I’m sure that will definitely work.

    Maybe instead of that we can work on being involved and elect people from the ground up who will prioritize people, and consider a tax code with some teeth. It’s not nearly as glamorous as meming though. Pointing your finger at billionaires for existing even though they will never see it is a bold strategy. Probably better to be pointing your finger at your lazy ass friends for not participating in even one day a year of contributing to society by voting.