Many people have reported this as a fake tweet. I don’t have time to be the tweet police. What is everyone’s thoughts about having a link to the actual tweet or other social media link?
Edit: Please stop reporting this. They may have re-posted this from somewhere else and didn’t know or it might not be fake. I’m not going to x to find out. From now on, please provide an archived link to all politicians and major figures.
deleted by creator
I’m for it. This is like the 15th fake Elon Musk tweet I’ve seen today
Yes, but an archived link so tweet cannot be deleted.
Good point, I’ll change the sticky.
Why not remove it then?
I’m not the mod you’re talking to, but I assume they aren’t deleting it because OP posted it before providing a link was a rule, and it might not be a fake tweet. I mean it is fake, but I can’t prove that.
Personally I’m in favor of mods erring on the side of not removing content if there’s any uncertainty, even if it’s a bit annoying seeing this fake tweet
It’s misleading on the people Twitter sub. Fake Wikipedia articles hard to distinguish would be misleading on a Wikipedia sub
It really feels like you didn’t actually read what I wrote
well, was it true? I don’t wanna go to xitter to find out :(
This is the way.
If this was true…Nd I wouldn’t be surprised that he would sya such a thing as… Making profit for the share holders. Is justified even if ruthlessly done…
I remember watching a documentary, it may have been Robert Reich that was explaining how businesses in the 1970’s made profits but the difference between the owner and the employee was high but still within a certain logic. Companies still had the philosophy that you should keep your employees for 30 years and treat them with a certain respect whereas today… A lot of big business are there for the shareholder and screw the employee. They are selfish anyway… Wanting more than minimal salary 🙄
Then again, I love reading Robert Reich… https://robertreich.substack.com/p/the-paid-what-youre-worth-myth
And yet another good article : https://robertreich.substack.com/p/if-bosses-are-raking-it-in-shouldnt
“This isn’t true but it may as well be, because it feels true to me” is always such a disappointing thing to see commented under misinformation.
What would be the misinformation? A typical working family in the 1970 could survive and feed their family. Today, a working family barely make enough money to pay for rent.
If CEO deserve their pay (hypothetically) then why would the employee not equally get higher salary increase?
Please explain how business have not, at least in the last 30 years, focused on gaining high profit for shareholders and care very little of the consumer or the workers.
A CEO goal is not to serve the board to the point of ripping a business apart. In that same breath, a Board should actually be held accountable to not pillage companies to simply increase their already big portfolio…
If this was true…Nd I wouldn’t be surprised that he would sya such a thing as…
It wasn’t true.
Worried Elmo? I hope so. Though I’d prefer you were terrified, you parasitic oligarch.
prolly the wrong climate to be openly admitting profits are more important than peoples lives.
A real “let them eat cake” moment.
I’ve heard that phrase my whole life and only looked it up now because of your comment. For anyone else that’s curious:
“Let them eat cake” is the traditional translation of the French phrase “Qu’ils mangent de la brioche”,[1] said to have been spoken in the 18th century by “a great princess” upon being told that the peasants had no bread.
…
The quote is taken to reflect either the princess’s frivolous disregard for the starving peasants or her poor understanding of their plight.
I had a history teacher who claimed that French bakers at the time called the layers of dough that were left on the bottom of the ovens and had to be scraped off periodically “cake” and that is what Marie Antoinette was referring to when she said “let them eat cake.” So it was just as heartless, but maybe less comically out of touch.
The one sentence the poster you responded left out:
The phrase “let them eat cake” is conventionally attributed to Marie Antoinette, although there is no evidence that she ever uttered it, and it is now generally regarded as a journalistic cliché.
And brioche is more like a rich egg bread than what I would recognize as cake.
The eggs and butter make it much more expensive though, so the sentiment is similar.
Someone might wanna “Deny, Defend, Depose” Musk. 😉
He’s too high profile. Too many people watching him at all times. An assassin would have a hard time getting to him I would think.
Hack his electronics and make his tv/laptop/phone do a jumpscare while he’s eating then he accidentally chokes to death. Total accident, nothing to see here.
Or you know, he got a nice tesla. It be a shame the steering malfunctioned by a weird “software glitch” and definitely not a hacker.
Somebody got shots at Donald Trump. Nobody is safe. If a trained shooter wants you and knows how their bullet is going to behave (wind, drop, etc) then you’re already dead.
Shh
I couldn’t find this tweet on Elon Musk’s Twitter feed
Thank you for your sacrifice (of going to x).
It was painful scrolling through his feed 😅
Does that mean he deleted it, or it’s fake? I don’t know how Twitter works.
It’s fake. It was posted on r/ToiletPaperUSA earlier today and clearly flaired as fake/satire.
Can you edit the title to flag that?
Ditto @ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
Ditto @ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
You are right, Elon would never share or post some off the wall shit!
Either is possible.
fake post!
True as anything else from xitter.
Apparently it’s fake, but sadly it’s too easy to see this being said.
I legit cannot tell anymore whether I’m reading satire or actual muskrat posts
If it’s any longer than the comment I’m leaving right now, it’s fake. He is never this verbose
right.
I just assume they’re fake, they usually are.
This is obviously fake. That’s what other CEOs think, not Musk.
The only duty of CEO Musk is to himself!
There’s been a bunch of Elon Musk tweets about this guy that are fake. But they’re all things he obviously believes.
Is there a list of healthcare company shareholders?
I guarantee you the companies will start freaking out once their largest shareholders start to be picked off and everyone else sells their shares.
The largest shareholders tend to be retirement funds. It’s generational warfare that no one realizes or talks about.
I would disagree that that is an example of generational warfare.
The older people get, the less of their money tends to be in actual stocks, and the shares managed by retirement funds are inevitably non-voting, so they can’t even voice what tiny bit of opinion their fraction of ownership would theoretically get them.The “shareholders” being performed for are the managers of those investment funds.
Making obscene wealth on stock investing is relatively rare, but making obscene wealth investing other people’s money and then paying yourself an obscene salary out of the proceeds is far more common.
Those are the people who control the massive amounts of money that companies perform for to drive up share prices.Why own when you can get paid to control? Then your money isn’t on the line and you don’t need to be lucky to get rich.
The older people get, the less of their money tends to be in actual stocks,
Eh it’s still a ton. And even then it’s in bonds which a good amount are corporate bonds, and guess what the corporation wants to do.
the shares managed by retirement funds are inevitably non-voting,
Really doesn’t alleviate the pressure of “maximize the shareholder value at all costs”. Fiduciary duty is ingrained, it doesn’t need to be actively decided on by the board.
And you do get rich from stocks, not that you need to because it’s a retirement fund. I think you’re barking up the wrong tree trying to pin this on the fund managers. They personally don’t even care if the stock goes up, because they get a percent fee no matter what.
My point was more that the corporate behavior is geared towards pleasing fund managers rather than retirees or people with retirement accounts.
The fund manager decides where the money goes, so they’re the ones that need to be happy. Yes, legally both the fund manager and the company have a fiduciary duty to the literally millions of people with 401ks that put money into their stock or fund, but in practice it’s fund managers who matter.
If blackrock says that all things being equal, they’re going to preferentially invest in sustainable companies, suddenly companies have an incentive to make themselves sustainable by whatever metric blackrock is using. Likewise when an investment firm doesn’t reduce their stake in an insurance company for harming patient outcomes.Non-voting means the CEO can be sued by them, but not replaced. It’s a different level of responsibility.
I still think your barking up the wrong tree. They are one cog in the machine which demand fiduciary duty.
Yes, but they’re the cog that makes choices about where to invest the money.
People with 401Ks who don’t know where their money is invested certainly aren’t to blame for corporate evil, even if they, as a block, make up the vast majority of shareholders.
https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2022/08/who-has-retirement-accounts.htmlSaying the blame for putting money before lives lives not with the people who control how the money gets invested, but instead with the more than 50% of the country aged 24-64 who have a hands off account seems very strange to me.
Why do you think the investment managers aren’t to blame ?
Market linked retirement funds, imo rank among one of the worst regressions in American governance/society.
It broke the employer:employee relationship where your work provides a pension, and you are secured in your old age for loyalty and time worked.
It directly enabled an emboldened a new group of parasites, who run hedge funds to gamble with other people’s money whilst skimming fees up and down the transaction flows. You win, I win - you loose, I win.
And those ‘smart people’ crash the economy every 10-15 years due to their collective greed and over leveraging in order to take the maximum profit they can - or society as a whole “lands softy” due to central banks fiscal policy via inflation, and we all see where that’s landed us.
Well those hedge fund managers still worked when it was DB pensions. But it just seemed to not be as crazy as it is now.
A DB plan at least locked in your retirement payout, allowing much more security of income than being left to the wolves in the stock market.
I’ve seen multiple workers who need to retire, it was past their planned date to retire despite saving for their entire lives, because ‘the market’ wiped out a chunk of their retirement package.
Yes DB is better for the person. I’m saying on the market and fund manager side it didn’t really matter. I don’t think DC contributed more to risk taking or the crazy maximizing, that just seemed to happen from greed and other factors.
In addition to what ricecake@sh.itjust.works said, this would be generational warfare against…themselves. Old people are exponentially more likely to need healthcare than young people are.
I’m talking about this in broad terms. What is the first way corporations in general save money? Pay employees as little as they can, destroy pension plans for new employees, etc.
And this is a lie. There is no law about this there is no duty for it. I mean your company is tock might not be the greatest but that is another thing.
Unfortunately, that’s not true. Dodge vs Ford Motor Co established the precedent of shareholder primacy when Henry Ford was successfully sued for attempting to reduce dividends in favor of reinvesting profits.
“I was just following orders”
-said every nazi ever
If killing CEOs reduces their profits, maybe they should work on not having unpopular CEOs
Public healthcare sounds better now. Purdue Pharma did some shady stuff to addict people to opium. Surely we should stop being upset at them maximizing their wealth too (they didn’t quite have shareholder, afaik. Just an oligarch family bribing doctors)
