• octopus_ink@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      I wasn’t sure where to put it. Wanted to put it in memes, but didn’t relish the inevitable “it’s not a meme” comments, so this seemed like the best fit.

      It’s NOT my OC and I encourage you to crosspost as you wish. 🙂

    • pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 days ago

      Kinda. Billionaires don’t usually have a checking account with a few billion in it because they took it from a company’s profit instead of giving it to payroll.

      Their net worth is largely in non-liquid assets like stocks and real estate.

      • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        6 days ago

        But, the acquisition of those nonliquid assets is still related to underpayment of wages, at least in cases of extreme wealth inequality (which is to say, pretty much every CEO currently).

      • Cruxifux@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        6 days ago

        Man I am so sick of people explaining this as if people don’t understand the concept of wealth as oppose to liquid assets. The argument still stands and it just serves to derail the point of whether billionaires should exist or not, and usually it’s used for tax evasion purposes and is entirely moot to the point anyway.

      • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        6 days ago

        The day they can’t leverage their stock to get infinite loans will be the day that this isn’t a lie.

        Otherwise, it’s a bullshit argument.

      • StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        6 days ago

        This tired response needs that “brain, big brain, super brain” three part meme.

        Something like “billionaires have most of their net worth tied up into non-liquid assets -> those non-liquid assets attained their high value due to workers being underpaid by exploitative employers -> billionaires are the exploitative employers”

  • Allonzee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    6 days ago

    Hey now, that’s not fair!

    The owners don’t “earn” shit.

    They lay down their chips from their last trip to the exploitation casino, and take.

    Leeches that don’t do shit.

    • BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 days ago

      I don’t think most people begrudge owners a reasonable profit, especially if they’re running things and taking an active role in the business and pay their workers well. It’s not unreasonable to have some cash squirrelled away for the business having hard times either.

      For me the issue is megacorps who exploit workers shaving working conditions and benefits until it’s bare bones, expecting more work from fewer people at higher quality, paying the bare minimum after being lucky enough to be the first to market with some idea so they’re in a completely dominant position and making billions.

  • RandomVideos@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 days ago

    Isnt this a contradiction?

    They earned a billion USD by underpaying you, but they still earned the money

    I think this post is missing a “fairly” or something similar

        • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          6 days ago

          “Earn” is a more objective word. Depends on who the judge is. Does a bank robber “earn” their money?

          But yes, it could apply by definition. It’s more a statement of opinion on the speaker’s part.

      • desktop_user
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 days ago

        aqqured though effort, if they had some morals* beforehand it would have taken effort to underpay that many people

        • credo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          There are actually two primary definitions, hence why I asked:

          • to receive as return for effort and especially for work done or services rendered // to bring in by way of return
          • to come to be duly worthy of or entitled or suited to // to make worthy of or obtain for

          Every major dictionary has some variation on both of these, including whatever duckduckgo uses

          Edit, I looked up your reference and I find it interesting you chose the third definition listed by duckduckgo to highlight here. But my point stands and both are there. The other definition is derivative of the third.

    • prototype_g2@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      I could spend an hour writing a long winded explanation of why capitalists “earn” their wealth through wage theft… but Comrade Hakim already made a video that explains this concept pretty well so here.

        • Holyginz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          Oh no, I’m so wounded lol. You have a lot of maturing to do before that kind of insult has any kind of meaning behind. Come on, corporate isn’t going to notice you if you don’t try harder than that.

          • babybus@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            The classic “I don’t care about you so much that I keep engaging in the conversation to prove you that I don’t care about you”.

            • Holyginz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 days ago

              You are so right, it takes me an immense amount of effort taking 2 minutes responding to someone while I’m taking a shit. I’ve literally never cared more about something in my life.

              • babybus@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 days ago

                while I’m taking a shit.

                You did not need to specify. I knew. After all, we’ve all seen your comments.

                • Holyginz@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  Cute. My shit would have provided a more intellectually stimulating conversation. Sorry, that means it would have been able to give more thoughtful responses.

    • Gladaed@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      6 days ago

      My man, what are you doing. We all dislike billionaires because the amount of money is not feasible to earn via honest wage work(<500k a year) in your lifetime.

      They ain’t successful, they cheat. (In a usually permitted form)

      • babybus@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        My man, what are you doing.

        I’m complaining about irrelevant content. These posts don’t fix the problem, they aren’t funny either. This is just an echo chamber repeating the same sound over and over again. There are other communities for that.