The difference is that the latter has a "superhero" at the heart of its economic decay... Fuckin' Batman, man. A self-centered whiner of an oligarch. (though that's pretty redundant, honestly)
FWIW, if Wayne donated his inherited fortune to legit social projects, he'd have to find a new hobby...
6 Comments
wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 7 pts · 2d
The difference is that the latter has a "superhero" at the heart of its economic decay... Fuckin' Batman, man. A self-centered whiner of an oligarch. (though that's pretty redundant, honestly)
FWIW, if Wayne donated his inherited fortune to legit social projects, he'd have to find a new hobby...
Ratio_Tile@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 2d
The one on the left is Lex Luthor's sugar baby
Zorque@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 1d
And also far more effectual at making a difference.
KarfiolosHus@discuss.tchncs.de · 2 pts · 1d
Yeah... because dumping money in a low-trust society immediately fixes the problem.
wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -1 pts · 1d
Yeah... because reductionist retorts are constructive, much less rational. 🙄 Nice logical fallacy, bud.
mrmisses@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 2d
I rewatched that batman the other week and laughed when Gordan couldn't believe that the Riddler had something like 200 followers.