2020 Democratic presidential primary

lol, whoops how was that video image also nsfw?
never mind.

Economy: We tracked down nearly all the 2020 Democratic candidates earlier this year and asked them the same 18 questions. Question no. 18: “Does anybody deserve to have a billion dollars?” Watch the video and explore more about the candidates.

— The New York Times (@nytimes) October 11, 2019

sigh.

If you worked every single day, making $5000/day, from the time Columbus sailed to America, to the time you are reading this tweet, you would still not be a billionaire, and you would still have less money than Jeff Bezos makes in a week. No one works for a billion dollars.

— Jeremiah Red🌹 (@_Floodlight) October 7, 2019

i think sund4r is right. warren carries with her from her republican days a belief in markets. but she thinks they're "rigged."

bernie believes that society should function according to the principle, "from each according to his ability, for each according to his need." and it's a long road to get there, but in the end, everyone having a warm place to live and access to a doctor is more important than an abstract principle of a "free economy."

― treeship., Tuesday, October 15, 2019 11:12 AM (two hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

The notion of a ‘free economy’ is more about citizens being able to chose their own economic destiny, make their own economic choices, as consumers, labourers, businesses, etc. At this point in economic history, there is no doubt that public systems like single-payer or what they have in France enhance that very economic freedom. The two notions don’t negate each other at all. Economic freedom doesn’t mean corporations get to do whatever they want, is just that citizens would have more choices, and choices that are closer to their needs. Something private health companies are unable to provide.

I would really like us to retake some pro-capitalists and pro-markets notion from the Hayeks and von Mises and Friedmans which have not only wrecked havoc in our well beings as citizens, but also created this false social dichotomy in which the choice only seems to be between supply side economics as decided only by corporations and supply side economics as decided only by the state. (For all the criticism I give Sanders, I know he doesn’t believe in that dichotomy at all).

If you worked every single day, making $5000/day, from the time Columbus sailed to America, to the time you are reading this tweet, you would still not be a billionaire, and you would still have less money than Jeff Bezos makes in a week. No one works for a billion dollars.

Lol you absolutely would I swear a rose in your twitter means I don’t how money works.

I think of myself, vainly, as someone who ~actually~ beholds the amazing scale of large numbers, but that blows me away. It would add up to a touch over $962 million, including leap years.

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/191/035/135.png

Also didn’t realize bezo is making billions/week, shit

Here I am feeling guilty about wanting some new socks

We need a political revolution

2019 - 1492 = 527

527 * 365 = 192,355

192,355 * 5000 = 961,775,000

so not a billion.

VHS is mad that rose emoji guy didn't account for The Highlander's inevitable investments.

But you couldn't spend that much, and there surely some ways you could have safely invested at least some of it with decent rates of return and OMG why are we discussing it like it is real thing sdaflkj;wohgia

xp multiply it by 365.25 to factor in leap years imo

I would take the leap days off. Decompress.

xp multiply it by 365.25 to factor in leap years imo

― It is my great honor to post on this messageboard! (Karl Malone), Tuesday, October 15, 2019 11:04 AM (fifty-one seconds ago)

oh yeah, doh

xp we’re discussing this because o have been working since 1492 and I am another 2 orders of magnitude beneath any of these examples

5000$ for one day of work in 1492 would compound at over 36 billions, at a lowly 3% rate.

You could also just become an antiques dealer, which makes sense (the Highlander did so iirc)

Colombus didn't drop off a package at my house last week with shoes, razor blades, a gold chain, memory for my computer, and a flute with free shipping

(Highlander callback)

Well, I have to go back to work now. Sorry about that everyone

ban VHS bring back gabbneb

Milo can you contribute anything other than insults?

(Why am I still thinking about this but) just buy stuff, forget about it, sell it later.

Or buy all the land in, say, California and Florida and Manhattan.

Geez no imagination here.

Outbid the US for the Louisiana Purchase, establish central North American empire

5000$ for one day of work in 1492 would compound at over 36 billions, at a lowly 3% rate.

I think this actually supports the tweeter's point, though. You couldn't get paid a billion just for your labour, even at that high of a rate for several lifetimes. The only way someone could is from profiting from capital.

i love how vhs is using money-making-money ex post facto to be pedantic about someone making the pretty clear-cut case that money-making-money is immoral

anyway gabbneb was a better poster, milo otm

I think this actually supports the tweeter's point, though.

yes ffs

gabbneb was at least out of his mind

How the heck is capital investment immoral? You know some state use public investment to pay for citizens free college tuitions and public health care right?

lol

go off sweetie

There may be a useful distinction between "capital investment is immoral" and "capital investment is not 'work.'" Just sayin.

The tweet is about it not being work. map is saying it's immoral.

to be clear i'm saying growth economics are immoral

not just capital investment but the entire framework that allows and encourages it

It doesn’t support the tweet because the economic reality is not that they are people who have capital and then people who don’t, everyone has some investments, if only in the form of the state providing infrastructure, and people who work a decent wage end up investing, christ especially at 5000$ a day. The notion that you can make a smart point about economics imagining someone stuffing 5000$ liquid under his bed everyday for 5 centuries is so far from normal economic behavior I don’t how it would illustrate anything.

There may be a useful distinction between "capital investment is immoral" and "capital investment is not 'work.'" Just sayin.

The tweet is about it not being work. map is saying it's immoral.

― Sayonara, capybara (Ye Mad Puffin), Tuesday, October 15, 2019 2:18 PM (five minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

As anyone serious ever said capital investment = work?

the majority of people do not see the world as a collection of investments. it's a simple illustration of scale and if you can't comprehend the extremely basic point that it's monstrous for a single person to have a billion dollars i don't even know... i mean it simply outs you as a the sort of person who is very into collecting zeros at the end of the number in their bank account

to be clear i'm saying growth economics are immoral

― cheese canopy (map), Tuesday, October 15, 2019 2:20 PM (five minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Yeah true growing literacy rates and growing health care is immoral.

lol again

come on dude this is not that hard

capitalism is an economic paradigm that needs to be transcended. map otm. endless growth is not sustainable, ecologically or socially. no one really knows what to replace it with -- a gradual move toward more and more worker ownership, stronger public institutions, more goods becoming public that were previously sold, this is the start

also, breaking the mythology that someone can "earn" a billion dollars. they can acquire it, but the labor that produced the value was done by millions of other people

None of those things would alter growth Treeship.

i'm into doing smart capitalism for pragmatic reasons since there's a huge gap between an equitable zero-growth world and what we have now but we're only going to get to something approaching sustained sanity with a model that doesn't look like cancer.

it does, though van horn street. it means taking away the idea that profits are a holy value, and ever-increasing profits are the only path to social sustainability.

Imo It’s okay for billionnaires to exist as long as they are heavily taxed in both income (75% +) and wealth (2%+). If health is publicly provided, education is free, the arts funded, environment regulated etc then I don’t care how much Bezos make.

but that kind of concentration of wealth creates a massive power imbalance, especially in a world where elections aren't publicly funded.

Have fun getting all of those things while billionaires exist xp