"If you work a whole f--king week at a job, you should be able to pay your f--king rent," the comedian cried on his podcast.
  • Noxy@pawb.socialEnglish
    6·
    47 minutes ago

    Disagree. Rabid dogs who must be euthanized deserve care, compassion, and respect when doing so. Rabies isn’t a life choice a dog makes.

    Billionaires deserve no such care, compassion, or respect.

    also did Bill Burr ever apologize for all the transphobic shit he’s said recently? Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy with anyone of any walk of life gaining class consciousness, especially if they talk about it. But it’d be even better if he’s stopped being transphobic on top of that.

  • Zink@programming.dev
    17·
    2 hours ago

    Maybe we collectively need to recognize billionaires like they recognize their workers. I propose the following:

    1. “Becoming a billionaire” is still a thing that the most aggressive, ambitious sociopaths among us can aspire to. Because they and the broken people that idolize them will insist that great things cannot happen without the promise of great rewards. And obviously the only “reward” of any meaning to them is money.

    2. Once you are a billionaire, you get a nationally broadcast pizza party on CSPAN and we engrave your name into a plaque in some “hall of smart winners” somewhere in DC. You are declared a champion of the economy and the President shakes your hand and declares a one-time national day to be in your honor. Or they read your name during the superbowl that year or whatever. Your place in history is locked in.

    3. Assets and earnings in excess of 1 billion are seized and given to charity, or infrastructure, or healthcare or whatever. Used for the betterment of society. It should be done responsibly in a way that won’t ruin the assets, for example not liquidating billions in stock all at once.

    4. The government publishes a leaderboard every year that shows which Champions of the Economy™️ gave the most back to society that year in the form of excess earnings. And we all pretend that we’re REALLY impressed.

    They can have their on-paper status and their superficial adoration they hunger for. And they can even be stupidly rich by ANY standard.

  • MithranArkanere@lemmy.world
    1562·
    8 hours ago

    Well, that is a bit excessive.
    Rabid dogs are put down because there is no cure for their disease, and they cannot be controlled, and their very existence will bring harm to others and…

    Nevermind.

  • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
    733·
    5 hours ago

    Imagine if we gave hoarders the same status we give wealthy people.

    Like you’re invited over for dinner.

    You get to the door and ring the bell. They yell, “come in.” You push the door open against 10000 stacked news papers pushing back at you. You’re instantly hit with the smell of animal feces and urine. You unironically say, “wow, so decadent.” You climb over a pile of furniture and to get to a small clearing in with a couch and a coffee table covered in clutter. You tell your host, “So much stuff, I’m so jealous, you truly possess all the worlds material goods.” They heat up some discount canned ravioli on a hot plate because the only place in the entire house you can habitate is that small clearing with the couch.

    After you finish your fine dining experience you leave and you realize you never once saw any animals.

    Hoarding is a disease. Doesn’t matter if it’s useless garbage or the idea of a pile of money you’ll never use.

  • sumguyonline@lemmy.world
    301·
    8 hours ago

    Me: EAT THE RICH! Bill Burr: I got you fam…

    1. To be clear, the 1% I am speaking about are NOT the 1% of your neighborhood, county, or city(necessarily). I speak of the Global 1%. The 1% that make your retired home owning uncle with just under 1million in his retirement look like the firmly lower middle class that he is.
  • PhAzE@lemmy.ca
    331·
    9 hours ago

    Yep, let people make all the money they want, but once you hit 10 billion, you get luigi’d.

    • Jarix@lemmy.world
      1·
      2 hours ago

      Stop thinking in terms of dollar amounts, think in disparities or ratios over minumum wage/poverty line for an economic region/group

      Figure out what our actual acceptable limit is and keep it there despite number of units as that will just need to be continually adjusted

      Edit: crap not who i meant to reply to. Still applies though so ill leave the comment

      • RaoulDook@lemmy.worldEnglish
        6·
        8 hours ago

        Right, I would say the limit should be “no billionaires” so that if your net worth including investments exceeds $999M then you have to sell off some property or give money to the taxman until you are under $1b net worth. $999 million is still more money than anyone would ever need but just having no billionaires would be a great start.

        • DrDeadCrash@programming.dev
          2·
          3 hours ago

          I’d say make a progressive scale such that 1 billion is the theoretical limit, meaning you would need infinite gross/pre-tax wealth to exceed 1 billion in net wealth after taxes.

        • jagged_circle@feddit.nlEnglish
          5·
          8 hours ago

          That’s still probably too high, but its a number nobody can object-to. Would be easy to pass that law in a democracy.

      • PhAzE@lemmy.ca
        3·
        7 hours ago

        Even 1 billion works. You have to make it high still, or everyone will say “bu-bu-but that’s communism”

  • drunkosaurus@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    524·
    11 hours ago

    The rich are not the problem, the wealthy are the problem. I like the way Chris Rock put it: ‘Shaq is rich… The white man who signs his check is wealthy.’

    Millions of people could be up there with Bill Burr, if a few hundred wouldn’t hoard over half of all wealth in the country.