• Empricorn@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    “Rational”!? No, that’s false. Though it might be reasonable for someone who works for a living. But the only thing they are risking is their “high score”, nothing else. Literally nothing a billionaire does is rational, and that goes for every single one of them. I feel like we all constantly forget how much $1 billion is. https://mkorostoff.github.io/1-pixel-wealth/ These people have several or hundreds of times that! Don’t forget they didn’t actually earn it. Plus, it’s still not enough. They choose to spend their time “working” and influencing governments instead of spending time with family. Power and money, they can never have enough…

    Can you imagine your generational line’s entire lives being paid for before they’re even born plus the ability to literally solve suffering in society. Homelessness? Malnourishment? Drought? Hunger? The amount of wealth they sit on could literally solve any problem, anywhere in the world with a signed check and it wouldn’t even affect their day-to-day life at all. They just choose not to. I can’t imagine it. That’s what’s wrong with billionaires and why they’re not rational at all…

      • Empricorn@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        But I’m not. To distill my rambling: it’s not rational to feel the need to “cozy up to an incoming fascist dictator.” Because billionaires simply don’t have needs. Housing, healthcare, education, food, security, it’s all paid for, for the next 100 generations. That was my point.

        The parts about morality were 100% me ranting…

        • RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Who’s making the argument that cozying up with a dictator makes the difference between them being able to meet their lowest Mazlow needs?

          • Empricorn@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            I’m not familiar with that term. I thought we were discussing why it’s rational?

            • blazeknave@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 hours ago

              A) then look it up; concept or vocabulary, doesn’t matter, Google it before saying it’s whataboutism. The point was salient.

              B) self preservation is rational.

              C) parasites kill to survive in nature.

              D) something sucking for an observer, doesn’t make the observed’s rationale illogical.