1093
There should be a law for owners of media being kept at arm's length.
This is that "liberal news media" that Republicans keep yammering on about.
The one that's owned by six corporations.
But just think of the juicy government contracts
If Kamala really wanted to get back at Bezos for this, the best thing she could do is promote union membership in tech and in the press.
It has been Bezos' kryptonite for years, and while I hold zero hope that unions will grow in popularity in the US, having a president push for them might be enough to make big businesses shut up.
She shouldn't be "getting back" at people. That's Trump's MO, and a major part of the reason that makes him so unsuited for the role. She should do what's best for the country. So ultimately I agree she should be pushing for unions.
Bezos is worth so much there is no hope of a single president reigning him in.
It would require a group of countries going all at once at him. Otherwise we are not only stuck with Bezos for our whole life but his children and family will also be unstoppable.
These men should be disrupted. The "move fast and break things" was their mantra. Now they demand nobody move and nothing changes including wealth vectors.
Waltons entered the chat
If there is one thing that authoritarians are any good for, that is using their unlimited power to deflate millionaires' ambitions and keeping them in line e.g. Jack Ma https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56448688 (but yea, they will help them fuck everyone over if it benefits them enough)
long as he doesnt force a trump endorsement in its place, it could be an arguement for impartiality
90% wealth tax is needed
Maximum wealth law. Once you're worth more than 100 million, 100% of any new income goes to a designated fund for social programs.
100 million is enough money that there is still no real limit to how pampered your life can be, so there's no argument that the rule would hurt anyone.
Anyone with over 10 million dollars in wealth should be legally classified as a dragon and anyone stealing from their hoard shall not be punishable under the law.
Not so fun fact: The absolute richest dragons in all of fantasy, excluding Smaug, only have a net worth of several hundred million dollars. A Red Elder Wyrm will have, on average, around 2.5-3 million gold pieces of wealth, with an absolute maximum of 5 million gold pieces. That means that the absolute greediest, and richest type of dragon, by far, only has between 100,000 to 500,000 oz worth of gold.
Smaug being the absolute outlier because he had somewhere between 5 to 10 billion dollars worth of gold.
Now if you are wondering why I'm making a big deal about this, it is because 500,000 oz of gold is only worth about 1.1 billion US dollars. But that is the absolute outlier of the greediest type of dragon that there is. Still only looking at Chaotic Evil Red Elder Wyrms, the average would only be about 3.5 million gold pieces, or a mere 350,000 oz of gold. That's only about $850,000,000 and that is just the most average of the absolute greediest manefestations of greed that our limited minds could imagine. Most dragons would be absolutely fine with between $1,000,000 to $10,000,000. The literal manefestations of greed don't need more than $10,000,000 according to every treasure table.
Those people that have more than 100 million dollars have already passed the greed alignment chart into Chaotic Evil. They are damn near caricatures of dragons at this point.
You need to read up on Shadowrun.
Yeah, it's been pointed out before that Shadowrun has some ridiculously wealthy dragons. I think the point still stands since Shadowrun isn't exactly high fantasy. More like science fantasy, similar to Star Wars.
My favorite is always the Egyptian god deciding to save the equivalent of $10,000 usd every day and never spend a single penny of it back in 10,000 BC and they still don't have as much money as Jeff Bozos.
I believe that the normal person can imagine themselves as a dragonslayer far more easily than a godslayer. A dragonslayer just needs a sword, shield, set of armor, and an unbreakable will. A godslayer needs to be able to turn the entirety of their target, including the things that don't exist on any Universe Plane, or Prime Material Plane, into a black hole.
These modern "unassailable" individuals that constitute global fifedoms in and of themselves are merely dragons. They absolutely can be defeated. They aren't the invincible gods that they attempt to claim to be.
Edit: umm, what Egyptian god? They had a lot of them.
load more comments
(2 replies)
tax them until they learn to mind their own business
Free press in the USA? LOL, it becomes more and more difficult every time a US oligarch buys a news outlet.
Majority Report, Some More News. I suppose the on the other side of the aisle it would be Joe Rogan and Ben Shapiro.
There is still some of the fourth estate left that hasn't been bought by oligarchs, it's just not exactly effective on the leftward side of the overton window.
Ben shapiro is funded by a fundamentalist Christian billionaire...
Ahh, I see. I don't pay attention to him and was just trying to find someone right wing that wasn't on main stream media platforms
Breaking Points is up and coming. But all these shows still rely on Youtube which can pull the plug at any moment.
Breaking points shills russian propaganda... I wouldnt be surprised that if they also getting russian money like tim pool and lauren southern, similar vibes.
"How do you do fellow plebs"
Isn't the Daily Wire funded by oil barons? I wouldn't put them in the same category as MR which is entirely funded by their viewers and a handful of sponsors.
It's possible, I was just trying to think of right wing pundits that aren't on main stream media. I only know that Ben's wife is not having a good time, by his own admission. I just had to look up The Daily Wire to figure out which one it was.
Rep. Ted Lieu, a Democrat from California, in his own tweet on the news wrote, “The first step towards fascism is when the free press cowers in fear.”
I don't know if this is the free press cowering, or the free press being bought out by rich people. Either way, it's some bullshit.
Private ownership of a news outlet breaks every definition of "free" in "free press".
A "free press" no longer exists.
Eh.. no? Most free press is privately owned. Just not by billionaires who influence the content.
When Bozos bought it, this was the exact concern, because there is no ethical billionaire. I'm pretty sure he promised to not interfere with the reporting or content. Turned out to be another lying, selfish asshole with more money than he can ever spend... Who could have predicted that? (besides everyone)
load more comments
(6 replies)
“The most consequential election in our country, a choice between Fascism and Democracy, and you sit out? Cowards. Unethical, fearful cowards,” wrote one reader.
Haha, yep.
load more comments
(6 replies)
Wow, a hugely wealthy oligarchical capitalist facilitating the rise of fascism?
How completely unpredictable, with no historical precedent whatsoever!
Who could have possibly expected this?!
Some real bald-headed behavior right here.
load more comments
(22 replies)
Oh man the first 3 words got me excited.
That was my first reaction as well, but I've been well trained to expect a trick.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Has this f*ing idiot never heard of the Streisand Effect? The fact that they broke a decades long tradition to do this makes a louder thump than their endorsement would have.
He's not a calebrity reliant on publuc opinion. He doesn't give a shit.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2024
1093 points (99.0% liked)
politics
19107 readers
3882 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS