It serms incredible to me to give over a billion dollars to a random person.

  • Critical_Insight@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I can’t think of a single person who became a billionaire, yet added nothing of a value to the world. Sure they may have manipulated and exploited while at it, but there’s still usually a product of some sort in the end, and the fact that they became wealthy indicates there was demand for said product.

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If someone adds value to the world, but does so through exploitation of the workforce, scamming their customers, or tax evasion. They didn’t actually add anything to the world. They are net negative.

    • redballooon@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s an argument for the product, but the system still promotes shitheads to the heads of the companies that deliver said products.

      And that still means shitheads are shitheads, regardless of the amount of money they have.

    • FarceMultiplier@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Net negative matters.

      I could, for example, kill every animal in the forest then claim how good it is that the plants grew so much that year without so many things eating them. In the long run, it’s very negative however.

      Same for billionaires. You could say how great it is that we have electric cars, but who gets hurt and could it have been done without harm to people or society?