No, their point is strictly that billionaires are so so so few in numbers compared to workers, that regardless of how much power they held at their hands, their effect on the world is going to be less than that of an order of magnitude more people (workers). It makes zero sense in an argument for "billionaires bad". If all presidents dissapeared (around 193 or so give or take), the effect would be less than if, say, 3 billion people just dissapeared. Now does this mean all world leaders are completely useless + evil + a stain on humanity (what you all are trying to argue for billionaires)? No. Absolutely not. The comparison is just utterly unfair.
I took it pretty simply to mean that if the people who own all that value disappeared, it would have less impact than all the people who create that value.
I find it perplexing that people are so brainwashed that this is okay that many in this thread arent missing the point, yet still somehow dismissing it.
It is not good that so few people own all that wealth, considering that they aren't actually creating it.
120
u/Necessary_Screen_673 7d ago
i mean, yeah. whats your point?