It’s hilarious how Musk is the wealthiest with multiple businesses that are actively failing and cannot make a solid case for their valuation without going into fantasy scenarios.
But he can take out massive loans on that valuation.
And that money can be used however he wants.
Also, the recent IPO was him collecting money from a lot of people, and since he got exempted into a few indexes, people's retirement money is now tied to Musky scams.
This means that if Musky does decide to cash out and crash the economy, he'll have an instant bailout.
I think he only cares about this half-imaginary number being big as possible. He tried the politics/power thing for a bit but I feel it's clear that wasn't for him. He doesn't want to be on stage and talked about, those are just consequences of his real want. Everyone else that are even remotely close to him in that use way more to bribe, control and change things for their views.
Be careful though, suggesting that Starship might never fly, or Full Self Driving might never drive, or that data centers in orbit are unlikely to scale is dangerous on the Internet.
Starship flying means nothing when nobody is using Grok which wastes more money than Starship capsule make.
Full self driving is only 1 decade late. Tesla is already behind technologically and their quality is still pathetic.
Data centers in orbit will be orders of magnitude more expensive and complex than data centers on earth. Data centers on earth are having tons of trouble being built because the costs and materials needed are extreme.
Also, Elon Musk is a Nazi that really wanted to be invited to the Epstein pedophile parties.
It's okay to be nuanced about this. In a system where one person can "make" this much, things are so obviously out of whack that it's not contradictory to want that kind of wealth to be heavily taxed, while still holding the view that in an anarchist system taxation is not desirable.
Yeah, it’s also worth noting that “wealth tax” is the compromise. It’s the starting point for a good faith negotiation, which works within the bounds of the current systems. Because the alternative is “storm the compounds. We’d only need to livestream a mob eating like a dozen of the richest before the rest get the message and fall in line.”
I don't disagree in principle. But pragmatically, while a wealth tax is an imperfect system for wealth redistribution, it's still realisable on meaningful timescales. It can be done while working to achieve true horizontalidad.
Wait, taxes can now be voluntary?
’Cause mutual aid is something we praxis, but being threatened with violence for not complying to your burglary is “pseudointellectualism”?
If seeking a Robin Hood style remedy, may need tackle all the dormant pools of hoarded wealth, and all the squander.
It's fun maths to play with. If one is aware of at least a few of those pools. Especially banking, and suppressed access to resources (primary, technological, and more).
I don't even care what happens to the confiscated money; it could just *poof* out of existence and that'd be fine. What matters is that massive wealth inequality is objectively bad for society and must be reduced.
You think the removal of one system of government to institute another (even if that system is as little of a system as possible), along with a radical redistribution of wealth, happens without violence?
You think it happens with violence? Look what the french revolution led to. 100 more years of imperial rule and the most deadly war in European history. Look at what the Russian revolution led to, the USSR. The Chinese revolution.
Now look at how anarchist societies/groups emerged in history. Cooperation and mutual aid. The violence was for the most part defensive.
The only people who think violence is the answer, are the ones with superficial understanding of history who are suffering from Duning Kruger effect. Violent revolutions always lead to authoritarian's grabbing power and kick starting oppressive regimes.
Today is the parent of tomorrow. The present casts it's shadow far into the future. (...) Revolution that divests itself of ethical values thereby lays the foundation of injustice, deceit, and oppression for the future society. The means used to prepare the future become it's cornerstone. - Emma Goldberg
I don't get why you're being downvoted. No reasoning being given back. People flock to violent revolution without considering if it even leads to what we want in the first place.
This is an anarchist space so I expect reasoning if a proposal is being rejected.
Not really because this isn't real money. Especially in Elons case it's all in pumped up stocks that he could never sell without crashing the price. Not that this is making anything better and the current stock market is just another symptom of the death spiral we are currently in.
Financial obesity is an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.
Corporations are the only ‘persons’ which should be subjected to capital punishment, but trillionaires should be forced to transition into billionaires, and billionaires should be euthanised through taxation.
The graph (iirc about half way through maybe), with his added coloured blocks for the different eras lends some superb clarity to what's going on, the political philosophy shifting phases of accelerated worsening, and how bad it is, as in how much worse it is contrast to the worst time in history...
What we have now, makes the guilded age look like some kind of egalitarian paradi~~ well, maybe not paradise, but more egalitarian... much less egregious than would have been seen in the keynesian phase. How little they knew, of how much worse it could get, and was going to get. Pesky marketing, in rebranding same old corporate fascism as "neo-liberalism". Many likely not bothering with the term neo-feudalism, preferring the delusion there's anything "liberal" still going on. As if that limp thing were even enough to do any more than pretence on slowing down the consolidation of wealth and power even if it were what it's best definitions and ideals pronounce.
82 Comments
rafoix@lemmy.zip · 146 pts · 42d
It’s hilarious how Musk is the wealthiest with multiple businesses that are actively failing and cannot make a solid case for their valuation without going into fantasy scenarios.
ToastedRavioli@midwest.social · 51 pts · 42d
Which also means that his wealth valuation is a house of cards, he cant collect on the fake value without crashing it
chaogomu@lemmy.world · 56 pts · 42d
But he can take out massive loans on that valuation.
And that money can be used however he wants.
Also, the recent IPO was him collecting money from a lot of people, and since he got exempted into a few indexes, people's retirement money is now tied to Musky scams.
This means that if Musky does decide to cash out and crash the economy, he'll have an instant bailout.
Telorand@reddthat.com · 23 pts · 42d
Now where have I seen this before...? Gosh, if only history had some warnings...
M137@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 41d
I think he only cares about this half-imaginary number being big as possible. He tried the politics/power thing for a bit but I feel it's clear that wasn't for him. He doesn't want to be on stage and talked about, those are just consequences of his real want. Everyone else that are even remotely close to him in that use way more to bribe, control and change things for their views.
atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works · 18 pts · 42d
Be careful though, suggesting that Starship might never fly, or Full Self Driving might never drive, or that data centers in orbit are unlikely to scale is dangerous on the Internet.
rafoix@lemmy.zip · 13 pts · 42d
Starship flying means nothing when nobody is using Grok which wastes more money than Starship capsule make.
Full self driving is only 1 decade late. Tesla is already behind technologically and their quality is still pathetic.
Data centers in orbit will be orders of magnitude more expensive and complex than data centers on earth. Data centers on earth are having tons of trouble being built because the costs and materials needed are extreme.
Also, Elon Musk is a Nazi that really wanted to be invited to the Epstein pedophile parties.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world · 87 pts · 42d
So now Musk is richer than the next four richest combined?
I think this is getting a little out of control.
9point6@lemmy.world · 62 pts · 42d
He makes about $150,000,000 a day, passively from his assets.
Wealth tax now.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 10 pts · 41d
Fucking nauseating
alapakala@quokk.au · -17 pts · 42d
You folks hate theory, huh.
gid@piefed.blahaj.zone · 36 pts · 42d
It's okay to be nuanced about this. In a system where one person can "make" this much, things are so obviously out of whack that it's not contradictory to want that kind of wealth to be heavily taxed, while still holding the view that in an anarchist system taxation is not desirable.
mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 27 pts · 42d
Yeah, it’s also worth noting that “wealth tax” is the compromise. It’s the starting point for a good faith negotiation, which works within the bounds of the current systems. Because the alternative is “storm the compounds. We’d only need to livestream a mob eating like a dozen of the richest before the rest get the message and fall in line.”
alapakala@quokk.au · -8 pts · 42d
Nuance about larceny gets you Sweden. Larceny is the wrong approach to horizontalidad. You want to compensate workers for yields, not rob’m.
gid@piefed.blahaj.zone · 7 pts · 42d
I don't disagree in principle. But pragmatically, while a wealth tax is an imperfect system for wealth redistribution, it's still realisable on meaningful timescales. It can be done while working to achieve true horizontalidad.
alapakala@quokk.au · -2 pts · 41d
How?
gid@piefed.blahaj.zone · 4 pts · 41d
By removing the financial power that people who hoard wealth hold.
That can happen while building new, non-heirarchical systems.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 42d
That link is far too specific. This one gets the point across much more clearly.
alapakala@quokk.au · -2 pts · 42d
you forgot to append the #Against anchor.
it should be depressing many people still don't comprehend the problem with compulsory larceny.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 4 pts · 41d
Oh I just now realized that you're calling taxes, "compulsory larceny". Literally just "tax is theft" with a pseudointellectual patina.
Lol ok bud. Go live on SeaLand or some shit
alapakala@quokk.au · -3 pts · 41d
Wait, taxes can now be voluntary?
’Cause mutual aid is something we praxis, but being threatened with violence for not complying to your burglary is “pseudointellectualism”?
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 40d
No, trying to sound smart by using big words was the pseudointellectual part.
"Taxes are theft" is just the stupid bullshit I believed when I was 12 years old.
pennomi@lemmy.world · 27 pts · 42d
ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 42d
No its fine. No worse than having a single billionaire, really.
Jackusflackus@lemmy.world · 45 pts · 42d
All billionaires should be stripped of their wealth over 999 million and given to the rest of the world
hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 31 pts · 42d
Hanged, just hanged
ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 42d
Impossible to do both. If you kill them somebody just inherits.
And or course the concepts of money and ownership must be preserved.
Fleur_@aussie.zone · 3 pts · 42d
Keep killing till desired wealth distribution.
ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 42d
But make sure there's still money, and other fungible transferrable wealth!
msage@programming.dev · 2 pts · 42d
Invest in NFTs?
Akasazh@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 41d
Easy
Just hang them after their wealth is redistributed.
bitjunkie@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 42d
$999m is still an obscene amount of money, and they'd just start finding ways to amass it again
Dumhuvud@programming.dev · 5 pts · 42d
999M USD is still way too much wealth for a single person.
Digit@lemmy.wtf · 3 pts · 42d
Ever played around with the maths of that?
If seeking a Robin Hood style remedy, may need tackle all the dormant pools of hoarded wealth, and all the squander.
It's fun maths to play with. If one is aware of at least a few of those pools. Especially banking, and suppressed access to resources (primary, technological, and more).
grue@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 42d
I don't even care what happens to the confiscated money; it could just *poof* out of existence and that'd be fine. What matters is that massive wealth inequality is objectively bad for society and must be reduced.
Digit@lemmy.wtf · 5 pts · 42d
Great point.
Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 38 pts · 42d
Buddahriffic@lemmy.world · 30 pts · 42d
The five wealthiest people who show up on the lists.
Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 42d
I love how Musks conpanies keep losing money yet somehow the stupid fake value just keeps growing.
I hate speculative capitalism so much
AnchoriteMagus@sh.itjust.works · 19 pts · 42d
Not unless we stop them.
A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 7 pts · 42d
How? I don't see them stopping until the supply lines collapse.
AnchoriteMagus@sh.itjust.works · 34 pts · 42d
You don't see Brian Thompson making any more money for United Health, do you?
Zorque@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 42d
No, but plenty of other people do, and the person that shot him clearly hasn't been doing much else to "help".
So, either put your money where your mouth is, or stop spouting the same demagoguery bullshit and find an actually useful thing to suggest.
AnchoriteMagus@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 42d
You think the removal of one system of government to institute another (even if that system is as little of a system as possible), along with a radical redistribution of wealth, happens without violence?
I may have a bridge to sell you.
The_Terrible_Humbaba@slrpnk.net · 1 pts · 42d
You think it happens with violence? Look what the french revolution led to. 100 more years of imperial rule and the most deadly war in European history. Look at what the Russian revolution led to, the USSR. The Chinese revolution.
Now look at how anarchist societies/groups emerged in history. Cooperation and mutual aid. The violence was for the most part defensive.
The only people who think violence is the answer, are the ones with superficial understanding of history who are suffering from Duning Kruger effect. Violent revolutions always lead to authoritarian's grabbing power and kick starting oppressive regimes.
Today is the parent of tomorrow. The present casts it's shadow far into the future. (...) Revolution that divests itself of ethical values thereby lays the foundation of injustice, deceit, and oppression for the future society. The means used to prepare the future become it's cornerstone. - Emma Goldberg
Yliaster@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 37d
I don't get why you're being downvoted. No reasoning being given back. People flock to violent revolution without considering if it even leads to what we want in the first place.
This is an anarchist space so I expect reasoning if a proposal is being rejected.
over_clox@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 42d
Eat them, obviously 🍴
IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 42d
Do I have to? I feel like eating the muskrat is likely to cause a ketamine overdose.
over_clox@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 42d
Just make sure to boil him first, I'm pretty sure that should break down the chemicals, right? 🤔
Or just feed him to the pigs, either way 🤷
bitjunkie@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 42d
I would not wish that on pigs
Wispy2891@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 42d
It’s ridiculous that they could give away $1bn/yr in charity projects and they’d still be billionaires when they’ll finally die
philipp_@discuss.tchncs.de · 4 pts · 42d
Not really because this isn't real money. Especially in Elons case it's all in pumped up stocks that he could never sell without crashing the price. Not that this is making anything better and the current stock market is just another symptom of the death spiral we are currently in.
Blackmist@feddit.uk · 18 pts · 42d
If we all just collectively decided to eat the top one every week, the problem would just sort itself out after a month or so.
blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 42d
It would take more than 4-5 occurrences. Inheritance is a thing.
sobchak@programming.dev · 14 pts · 42d
It's going to continue to accelerate to a kind of feudalism where they own everything. Democracy or even capitalism itself can't survive this.
Zorque@lemmy.world · 26 pts · 42d
Capitalism is this. This was always the logical conclusion when wealth and success were so intrinsically linked.
y0kai@anarchist.nexus · 15 pts · 42d
lmao glad someone said it.
here's hoping capitalism doesn't survive this.
A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 8 pts · 42d
It is called capitalism because those with the most capital get to make all the decisions
nonentity@sh.itjust.works · 12 pts · 41d
Financial obesity is an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.
Corporations are the only ‘persons’ which should be subjected to capital punishment, but trillionaires should be forced to transition into billionaires, and billionaires should be euthanised through taxation.
jaemo@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 41d
They will stop once we have eaten a few of them.
ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 40d
They will not.
jaemo@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 40d
Then, we will say "we have not eaten enough of you and we are still very hungry caterpillars."
ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 40d
If you can still speak to them, they will not stop.
jaemo@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 39d
You forget yourself sir. I would be addressing my peers in such a context. I do not speak to food.
Digit@lemmy.wtf · 6 pts · 42d
Yup. Ben Norton did a good piece on this topic a few days ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj-hd3l4dSo
The graph (iirc about half way through maybe), with his added coloured blocks for the different eras lends some superb clarity to what's going on, the political philosophy shifting phases of accelerated worsening, and how bad it is, as in how much worse it is contrast to the worst time in history...
What we have now, makes the guilded age look like some kind of egalitarian paradi~~ well, maybe not paradise, but more egalitarian... much less egregious than would have been seen in the keynesian phase. How little they knew, of how much worse it could get, and was going to get. Pesky marketing, in rebranding same old corporate fascism as "neo-liberalism". Many likely not bothering with the term neo-feudalism, preferring the delusion there's anything "liberal" still going on. As if that limp thing were even enough to do any more than pretence on slowing down the consolidation of wealth and power even if it were what it's best definitions and ideals pronounce.
c_change@kolektiva.social · 5 pts · 42d
A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 8 pts · 42d
Source
c_change@kolektiva.social · 3 pts · 42d
A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 42d
Happy to help :>
Feathercrown@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 42d
William Gates III 🧐
gratux@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 pts · 42d
And the average person is not even a pixel.
Devadander@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 42d
If they were going to stop on their own they would have by now
A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 42d
This is a disaster awaiting to happen. We should prepare our communities for when SHTF
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/71026299
Mac@mander.xyz · 4 pts · 42d
So did Musk win? Is he done now?
quexotic@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 41d
They will be stopped by Democratic process (lol) or by an undemocratic one.
For now they still have the power of choice. I wonder how much longer that will be true.
Formfiller@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 42d
Where’s that worthless piece of dickskin Larry Ellison?
ChicoSuave@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 42d
As their wealth goes up, the available money goes down and we all work harder for less.
OhmsLawn@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 42d
That's not how money works lol
grue@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 42d
It is, in the sense that they use that wealth to oppress the rest of us.