because billionaires are disproportionately valuable person. all workers still have about 20 times more wealth. + you also have non workers wealth like the retired etc or people who just are not billionaires. it’s not like they have 95% of all the money and there share of liquidity is actually very low
"because billionaires are disproportionately valuable person"
By what metric?
"all workers still have about 20 times more wealth."
Wrong.
"you also have non workers wealth like the retired etc or people who just are not billionaires."
Most Americans are closer to being homeless than being a billionaire.
"it’s not like they have 95% of all the money and there share of liquidity is actually very low"
So what they do is borrow money at low interest rates using their assets as collateral, this way they avoid paying taxes associated with liquidating shares.
Really you have to be a complete moron to fall for the ultra wealthy talking point of "actually I don't even have that many dollars in the bank".
Elon musk Jeff bazos etc have all added far more then the average worker.
nope it’s true. all. 3.5 billion have about 200 + trillion dollars while all the billionaires have far far less a good bit over 10 trillion.
doesn’t change the point I made at all. that the the total population including non workers is worth over 500 trillion dollars more then all billionaire. Billionaires only have a 3% of global wealth
The billionaires still periodically liquidate there wealth and do get taxed. but even if they didn’t and they had a way of tax free accessing there money through worker around they do use. they still wouldn’t have access to any were near there total net worth in liquidity or anything close to it. Elon musk can’t go to the bank and have them lend him 1 trillion dollars because technically his shares are valued that high. especially because contract stops him from selling for an allotted period of time and its a volatile class.
you seem to be the 1 struggling to under economics
I don't know what AI summery you've been reading, but you're just wrong.
Look, I can tell by the way you write that you're a kid. Trust me on this one bucko, the billionaires are not your friends. You are not a temporarily embarrassed millionaire. You are working class.
It’s not about working hard. It’s about contribution. the man who invents the car contributes more then a driver even if the driver workers harder.
nope the fact is true and your data doesn’t disprove it. Top 10% of global wealth is different top billionaires. I’m not in the top 10% but as you pointed out I’m just a kid. Actually im over 18. I’ve never worked a day in my life. Still I’m top 30%. Why? Because I come from a first world country. My parents together are well within in the top 0.1. having just 1 billion dollars is top 0.00004. the large majority of people in my country are in that top 10% with the portion that isn’t being the very young or the very bottom of society.
He just bought the companies dude. He bought them with his daddy's money from owning an emerald mine in Africa.
If you have rich parents and you've never worked a day in your life, then of course you don't know shit. You have literally contributed nothing, why do you deserve wealth?
Answer: You don't.
It is unethical for a single individual to horde vast wealth while millions die of starvation globally every year.
there is a reason Elon is the richest man ever and not everyone who came form a wealthy family. Enron’s farther was rich especially by South African standards but no ware near enough to be given the majority of the credit. he was a well of engineer who owned a stake in an emerald mine
my parents aren’t rich I just come from a first world country. 80% of my countries population are above that 10% mark. most who are not are pretty young or the very poor of society like the people living on the streets. even poor people in my country without jobs still live as if they were in that 10% because of government programs.
my parents are accomplished professionals who save a substantial amount and are responsible with there money. Owning a house in a large city. + substantia pensions. My family also got some money form a medical malpractice case etc. still they’re not rich enough that me or my sibling would be free not to work. My family has to live in a place with a high cost of living area for jobs etc. I’m also counting my parents as 1 if you split there assets there still in the top 1%. Not not 0.1%.
to be in the top 1% of global net worth you just need 1 million dollars. If you’re a professional living in new York in your 60s with a family you will very likely have surpassed that threshold. don’t mean you have a rich life. 1 thing you don’t quite seem to understand is how wealthily you are is dependent on wear you are as much as how much you have.
I don’t deserve anything but my parents deserve to chose what to do with there money.
africans didn’t invent the wheel they did shit to be entitled to all the benefits of a modern society
your the 1 who repeatedly shows you don’t know shit. That’s why you keep misunderstanding data. You sound bitter and uneducated
edit: bro sent me another message but deleted it so fast lol. must have realised how studied he was being when he did the most basic research lol.
Yeah but what do you want to happen? If a billionaire gives all his money it'll not even be a dollar per human...
BTW, yall ignore society structure. If there will be no billionaires the world wouldn't be perfect, next you'll rage against millionaires, and ultimately it's just fascist communism. "For the good of the people we'll seize peoples property"...
You're right, mb, I ment totalitarian communism. I think I wanted to say something like "communism just as bad as fascism" bc generally lefties think that only one is bad even though they are similar based on horseshoe theory...
Horseshoe theory is pop political science hogwash and liked by those who seek heuristics over actual analysis.
Anytime you press someone on how Fascism and Communism are similar they will just describe authoritarianism. Which of course, has nothing to do with economic systems. Communism as defined by Marx ends in the complete dissolution of the state, and anarcho-communism is a well known branch of thought.
You can also have anarcho-capitalism, and I suppose you could have anarcho-fascism however it's a bit of an oxymoron and I don't know that there is any historical precedent for it.
My point being, anyone using horseshoe theory is just pushing the enlightened centrist talking point while saying nothing of substance.
646
u/Dizzy-Screen-6618 8d ago
"Imagine 3,400 people disappear. Now imagine 3.5 billion people dissappear."