Elaborate and explain
You must log in or register to comment.
Billionaires, because we are too dumb to not fall for their tricks
But AI isn’t. They’re creating their own downfall as we speak
The billionaires are already winning, with no signs of that changing.
They will just cook the planet killing us all
With pessimism like that, we won’t get far.
That’s because—for many reasons—there are way too many non-billionaires on team billionaire.
Hey, don’t look at me. I’m on team “unexpected astroid hitting the earth to end it all”.
I was devastated when my candidate never showed up again and again…
They think they’re on team billionaire but are willful idiots.
I worked with a guy that proudly proclaimed that he voted for the right because they looked after the rich.
He was not rich, but he purchased lottery tickets weekly and stated he’d rather get screwed while poor than pay more tax if he, some day, became rich.
And that was the day I realised that we’re fucked.
Ah, see, what you should have done was…stabbed him in the eye.
Just remember, when we go vote, his is worth just as much as yours.
What an absolute moron.
I don’t, I feel like moron / stupid just doesn’t cut it for idiots like this. I honestly don’t know of an adjective the fully encapsulates the stupidty, childishness, and naivite of a regular person aligning with the super rich.
Republican?
Corporate brainwashed, delusional, desperate, uneducated, lazy, close-minded, coping human?
The media is pushing “answer a few questions, or spin a wheel, and get rich”, and “sing in your car, then get famous on Idol” and getting huge ratings. Same way we got this fucking President. Corporate brainwashing.
If we decide money no longer matters it’d be petty easy to eliminate them all. If we continue to let money run our lives then it’ll continue to be pretty easy for the people with money to keep all their power.
If we decide money no longer matters it’d be petty easy to eliminate them all
Okay, but then where will I get my passive income? I worked 40 years in the shit and rusty needles mine to build up a big enough nest egg to get passive income. Now I’m too full of staff infections and lacerated limbs and shit lung to work anymore.
I can’t afford not to make the next guy work himself to death in the shit rust needle mine.
No one needs to work in a shit rust needle mine. Without money you would have community helping & taking care of you based on your needs & listening to your ideas. You would take as much as you need but as little as you can to live happily & work to contribute back.
It doesn’t take long for that system to collapse.
*Staph.
His people are infected. I think he might be a billionaire in disguise.
I mean… money does matter. It matters to the individual because it is how they pay their bills, and it matters to all of humanity because it is how we are able to take coordinated action despite the lack of any central organizer.
Taking money out of the picture would also take bills out of the picture. And humanity absolutely has the ability to coordinate action without money at least as well (if not better) than how it is now, the only difference is it would be harder for individuals to be the sole coordinator. Money, and who has it, is our current central organizer and will continue to burn the planet if we fail to take away its power.
And humanity absolutely has the ability to coordinate action without money
Please provide a non-authoritatian answer that has scaled and has produced advanced technology like modern medical devices and telecommunications devices.
While you’re correct that there are no examples of such a society*, that isn’t because money is crucial to development. It’s because the time of technological breakthroughs happened in a global capitalist economy. Just because that’s the way history played out doesn’t mean that was the only way it could’ve. Money didn’t invent those things, people did. They had the time and resources to make that stuff happen. And yes, they got those resources via a moneyed economy, but that doesn’t mean those same people couldn’t have gotten the same time and resources had they existed within say a library economy.
*
Not exactly a perfect society (what is) but the Incas developed cutting edge technology for the time within a moneyless society https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inca_technology
I apologize for not being clear in what I was asking for. I didnt mean that I wanted an example of a society that, say, developed MRI technology outside the capitalist framework. I simply wanted an example of a society which could produce and use an MRI without the use of money or authoritatian force. They can have access to all the underlying science and technological know-how. But they need to get someone to mine the iron ore that will be smelted to be turned into streel which will become a tool which will be used in the manufacture of an MRI machine… without paying them.
Problem being - no one wants to mine iron ore. There are limits on how much prestige a society can distribute, and little will go to iron ore miners. The actual benefit of the labor is so far removed that the likelihood for personal gratitude from a beneficiary is vanishingly small - for example, someone who has a torn meniscus diagnosed with an MRI is unlikely to send the iron ore miner a personal thank you card. Of course, we could pay our miner in clothes and food and housing - but then we’ve just reinvented money but less efficient. Seeing no personal benefit to breaking his back every day in a dark hole, out miner would want to find something else to do with his time, resilting in no iron ore, and thus, no MRIs.
But I mean, prove me wrong.
I would again point to the Incas as a decent example. Though I kind of want to pick at your use of “money or authoritarian forces”.
Money is currently used as an authoritarian force. It’s given those with money restrictive control over our daily lives. Look at all the censorship by those who control the major websites and payment processors on the internet. Look at the who lobbied the creation of infrastructure that forces most every person in the states to own and maintain a car. Look at how they’re working on dismantling our public education system. Our police and military exist to protect those with money. This is how capitalism works. Despite some lofty ideas of peace liberty and democracy for all, when the system is based around money everything else will get compromised.
I read up on the Inca. Interesting. But I’m still doubtful they could build an MRI - I want a modern example.
And I’m certainly no fan of the current system - it sounds like you’re describing America, and yes, America is a bit of a shit show at the moment. But we should also remember that Sweden’s strong social safety nets, Finland’s excellent education system, and the Netherlands’ transportation infrastructure all exist in societies which use money.
Meanwhile, I don’t think eliminating money would really solve the problems you are looking to solve. Power-hungry people will seek power regardless of the system they find themselves in. If they don’t become capitalists, they become high-ranking bureaucrats and politicians.
humanity absolutely has the ability to coordinate action without money at least as well (if not better) than how it is now
That’s a huge claim, you need to support that.
Not that huge of a claim, especially when now is so chaotic and dysfunctional. Here’s a nonexhaustive list of moneyless economies (obviously with varying degrees of feasibility)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-monetary_economy
~edit: wording~
The huge claim is the present tense, “has the ability”. It’s not a huge claim to say that humanity has the potential to one day transcend money, but that wasn’t the claim. Humanity has a long road before that’s possible, it does not presently have the ability to continue to function if we just snapped our fingers tomorrow and eliminated money.
An “ability” is not a vague notion bolstered by historical curiosities. An “ability” involves a detailed, immediately actionable plan that can be implemented in the modern economic landscape without destroying crucial productivity.
Resources have to be allocated. People need to accept the resource allocation method in order to contribute their labor to do things that must be done. Money is an imperfect solution. Eliminating money leads to reinventing it (e.g. “energy credits”), reverting to less efficient models (e.g. barter), developing a central planning body that replaces wealth corruption with administrative corruption, or widespread social loafing where nothing gets done.
Without an actual plan of implementation that gains the trust of the workers, there is no “ability”, merely aspiration.
I disagree with a few points you bring up, but beyond those, it sounds like your biggest problem with my statement is in the semantics. I don’t find that to be very useful when obviously the logistics of such a system are complicated enough to warrant a whole doctorate degree. Comments on social media between strangers with no verifiable education isn’t really the place to harp on precise wording and definitions. I think it’s possible for humanity to coordinate without money. Is that better? Or do you still disagree?
Semantics are how we communicate ideas. If you change the semantic content, you change the idea.
I think it’s possible for humanity to coordinate without money.
Depends on what you mean by possible. At some point in the remote future? Sure, I agree. At the present time? I disagree. We’re not there yet, and you can’t just snap your fingers and change the fundamental beliefs, and logistics administration, of 8 billion people overnight. Best case scenario that’s a multi-generational endeavor.
We can get there one day, we can’t outlaw money tomorrow.
Huh, it’s up to 3000 now.
If it’s actually defined as a fight with two sides, 8 billion people. IRL it’s not really they’re just kind of the visible tip of a giant inequality iceberg.
With modern drones and AI tech?
I was just yesterday talking to someone about how AI drones, specifically exactly AI drones, will be a pivotal piece of technology in a way I think even beyond nukes in some sense. With a decent AI drone swarm, it’s not hard to imagine a SINGLE person dominating an entire population. The dictator’s purest dream - none of those pesky military generals getting uppity.
The most successful method the wealthy have used to subvert social movements is infiltration. When a drone swarm can do that, then drone swarms will be what I worry about.
homer patting Bart on the shoulder meme
The most successful method so far!
Welcome to our AI Security and Defence catalogue. Shop below for your advanced security needs.
-
AI Micro Drone Advanced AI driven micro drones delivering chemically induced and untraceable coranary heart attack dosage to desired target. Drone is single use and will self dispose leaving no traceable evidence of origin. The mark II model will now remain in observational positions for up to 6 months before identifying the most ideal moment of engagement with the target and their environmental conditions. 3 BTC per unit.
-
AI Hounds Advanced AI driven perimeter control drones. These four legged hounds pack more than the traditional bite. 10 short range mini guided missles, flame thrower with napalm, 2 razor clamp traps, tear gas, poison gas and 360° bayonet. Fully reenforced titanium alloy shell, water proof, bullet proof, fire proof. The hound can run 40mph, jump 6 feet high and operates autonomouslly for up to 7 days without recharge.
Various operational modes available including:
- Hunt, Identify and Kill
- Perimeter Defence
- Location Defence
- Observe and Report
Thank you. And if it should please you, our AI humanoid Companion© range may have that next special someone waiting just for you!
-
Cash me outside
Don’t worry, the entire system is collapsing from mismanagement.
All evidence points to a regime change (in the physics sense, not the political) being the necessary condition for things to go from our current state to something new.
We currently have people paying poorer people a very small amount of their own net worth to protect the wealthy person’s status and position. This is similar to how kings and queens paid the army and policing forces to control the peasants.
Before the French Revolution I am sure it seemed impossible that the peasants would revolt, but the years leading up to the revolution things were getting worse and worse for the average peasant. There is a tipping point where the average person does not think the current system is delivering on the promise that of you do what you are told you can have a good life. I think we are approaching that point now.
If the rich try to hire someone and underpay them for security, stiff contractors for services, flaunt laws and generally behave obnoxiously at some point people will have had enough. Whether that ends with guillotine action or people just divesting from those systems depends on how much freedom people think they have.
If people thought they could go and homestead, live off the land, and get by without the massive companies these billionaires own then they would have that outlet and choose that peaceful option. The fact that we have taxation creates a pressure to pay in currency which demands earning in that currency. Same with paying rent, you have to earn money simply to live. No amount of growing all of your food gets rid of your financial obligations, so there is no out from the system. If that system is unreasonable it begins to feel less like participation and more like coercive control. Wage slavery is not the same as slavery, but both involve coercion and require the legal system to support them. Both lead to revolutions. Both lead to violence.
I guess the billionaires have to decide if they really want to paint that big a target on their backs by flaunting their wealth. At this point I think they feel untouchable.
The biggest ruse in American history is the modern billionaire convincing the working class Americans that the immigrants, homeless, people of color, and LGBT+ people are the real enemy and the reason you’re unhappy. Capitalism is the only functioning system of government, don’t pay attention to the fact that almost every other developed country has universal healthcare.
Mostly all agreed, but the populace isn’t starving, not even close. I’m not arguing that we’re not suffering, only that we’re nowhere near suffering enough for a revolt. But damned do I like what you’ve written!
8 billion temporarily embarrassed millionaires.
3000 billionaires because you can’t convince everybody to ditch school. You can’t change people. Pharaoh, Hammurabi. Those are thousands of years of genetic obedience.
I don’t know if I like assuming that obedience is a genetically heritable trait. I’ve heard racists use this assumption to argue that racially Chinese people are more likely to be sneaky servile backstabbers because that’s what their genetics are selected for due to their political past.
Controversial statement incoming: I also don’t want to preemptively rule out the possibility of obedience, or anything else, being genetically heritable - even if it could lead to these uncomfortable conclusions. I think scientific studies should be done about such things to answer the questions of whether these personality traits are heritable, come what may of that knowledge. But to my relief, from the studies I’ve seen, personality traits heritability is on very shaky ground in most cases.
What are we measuring. Like just a braw? A unanimouse revolution?
Ok, let’s look at this…
IF billionaires were removed from the picture, what would be the result?
There would be investment assets in various holding entities that would then be what, up for grabs? Sold off? Put in probate? Trillions in stock alone would suddenly be ownerless. How would that affect the market and the regular person’s investments?
Multiple BoD positions and CEO positions opening up. How would those be compensated? Just make more people rich?
Material possessions originally worth absurd sums now up for grabs to nobody who could realistically afford to use or maintain them (yachts, palatial homes, etc). Manufacturers of luxury goods would vanish (stupidly expensive watches, clothes, cars).
How would you prevent some other greedy, power-hungry f_cks from taking up the reins and putting us right back where we started? There is no point in civilization’s history where greedy f_cks haven’t existed, so how do you prevent their grubby fingers from tipping the scales right back in favor of piling all the money and power in their corner?
What are the unintended consequences?
(This is NOT an argument implying we should keep billionaires, just asking realistically and pragmatically what the result would be should they no longer exist)
The implication that they would all be killed or completely stripped of assets is the problem you’re trying to solve, however, that doesn’t have to be the action taken. Perhaps instead, the 8 billion people of the world decide to enact a society that insists that such accumulation of wealth is obscene and should be curtailed. Perhaps systems could be introduced to make the wealthy more accurately contribute to the society they profit off.
Billionaires become billionaires through exploitation. Exploitation of workers, financial systems, and political power for personal gain. Make them pay for all these things.
Pay for education of the people they use to build their companies. Pay for the healthcare of the entire population, which they degrade with their business practices. Pay for the infrastructure that enables them to do business. The roads, the safety nets, the national parks, the air quality, the water supply, the land they use. Make them pay to replace and repair, fully, any damage their business causes. Polute the stream, pay to fix it. Dig the ground for ore, repair the ground so it can be used again. Make them replace what they take from society for little or no cost because their goods are only affordable because they do not reflect the true cost of production. Make their businesses pay for all these things, and the cost of production will rise to include the true cost of production. At the moment, the shortfall is paid for by we, the people, which enables them to become billionaires. Exploitation.
We don’t have to kill anyone, or strip anyone of all their assets in some revolutionary action. We just have to make them pay the true cost of their exploitation.
Tax the rich. Use those taxes to repay their exploitation. Increase the cost of doing business to include the cost of repairing the impact.
People can still become very wealthy. But society will also become much stronger through the use of the extra revenue to benefit all.
To make this happen will take a revolution, but it doesn’t need to include guillotines, it just needs people to become aware. Sadly, the politicians and media are also owned by the billionaires, making the final step of collective uprising extremely difficult. But humans have done it many times before in the face of adversity, perhaps it can happen again.
The same issues arise whenever billionaires pass from old age or sickness. The world will be fine.
Nationalize the assets
Pretty simple and effective.
The correct answer is to redistribute their wealth.
Trillions in stock alone would suddenly be ownerless
The same removal mechanism will need to keep new rich people from getting too rich. In general everything could stay the same in terms of assets if they are divided more equally. Even a billion dollar yacht could be divided and rented out. Who’s paying for a billion dollar yacht vacation when there is no ultra rich? Divide that shit again into 500 admissions for a boat party until it doesn’t make sense to upkeep.
What kind of battle are we taking about? Violence? Then 8 billion people would win because the combined force of knowledge.
This question also really depend on strategy. You know a billion worth doesn’t need to be all in cash. Before cash was a thing, we traded items… but it’s rare to trade items that are exactly worth the same, so money is a nice way to compensate that.
The billion worth can all be spent on defense, it can all be spent on pleasing the 8 billion people. It can be spent to create harmony instead of hatred.
We’re already seeing the results of the fight, so no need to elaborate on who would win and how
Unfortunately that is not how the figures really are. Way too many of those 8 billions will willingly simp and fight the rest of us in the name of those billionaires.
