The ongoing X and Elon Musk Transgressions Thread

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by MoneyGuy

That’s okay. If you’re approaching 5,000 you’ve followed and only have <4,000 followers, for example, you could be restricted from following more.

If that’s you, well done.

Why are you following that many people? No way you’re paying attention to the thoughts of 5000 people.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Why are you following that many people? No way you’re paying attention to the thoughts of 5000 people.

It's just to boost your own numbers. Random people I don't know add me, probably mute me, and if I don't add them back then they unfollow me. It's as shallow as it looks.

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Why are you following that many people? No way you’re paying attention to the thoughts of 5000 people.

I was speaking generally - not me.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Not to nitpick, but this is factually incorrect and Gates is also a massive piece of garbage.

The moral of the story is don't simp for billionaires.

Outside of cheating on his wife which I truly don’t care about what other things has he done?

All people have good things and bad things about them. At least he created a massive charitable organization and is trying to solve massive human problems and spending his time / energy there. To me that’s better than Musk or other billionaires.

Generally though, my personal opinion is that the cap of wealth should be $1B and anything earned beyond that goes 100% to the state. Nobody needs even close to that amount anyway. Need wealth redistribution.

[PeteMoss]

Gates at Microsoft was ruthless. A rare company that the US government actually took action against due to monopolistic activities.

[aaronck]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Outside of cheating on his wife which I truly don’t care about what other things has he done?

He publicly lied to Americans 30573 over his 4 years in office- that's a great start

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...er-four-years/

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by aaronck

He publicly lied to Americans 30573 over his 4 years in office- that's a great start

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...er-four-years/

Bill Gates, not Trump.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by aaronck

He publicly lied to Americans 30573 over his 4 years in office- that's a great start

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...er-four-years/

I think they were talking about Gates.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Gates at Microsoft was ruthless. A rare company that the US government actually took action against due to monopolistic activities.

- Took public subsidies to build Windows, privatized the profits, and then fought a crazy patent war against public use
- Monopolistic business practices
- Sex pest
- Epstein
- Lobbying in favour of vaccine patents
- Foundation that has screwed over large parts of Africa, schools, etc.

[aaronck]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

I think they were talking about Gates.

Oof- I saw cheating, and assumed Trump-

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by rubecube

- Took public subsidies to build Windows, privatized the profits, and then fought a crazy patent war against public use
- Monopolistic business practices
- Sex pest
- Epstein
- Lobbying in favour of vaccine patents
- Foundation that has screwed over large parts of Africa, schools, etc.

-Windows 8

[STAMPEDRED]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Outside of cheating on his wife which I truly don’t care about what other things has he done?

All people have good things and bad things about them. At least he created a massive charitable organization and is trying to solve massive human problems and spending his time / energy there. To me that’s better than Musk or other billionaires.

Generally though, my personal opinion is that the cap of wealth should be $1B and anything earned beyond that goes 100% to the state. Nobody needs even close to that amount anyway. Need wealth redistribution.

Interesting statement.

How do you suppose that the funds over $1B should go to the state? What part of their piss-poor manangement of funds makes one think they should be given even more to manage?

Balance this with how many governments - any level - or even grander countries, are not in debt? Hi Ne can argue good debt and bad debt until the cows come home - regardless it’s debt. Means you owe and if something goes sour in that lender relationship who has control?

Point is: gov by and large across multiple levels mismanage funds all the time and run higher and higher debts/deficits. So in your estimation the government should receive bail money from others who have learned how to succeed and grow their wealth / finances in excess of $1B so they should be stopped from having too much.

Here’s a thought to at least consider:

No matter what one makes or earns, when you die you take Zero of it. So decide while alive what to do with the money made. Personally, I wouldn’t be for supporting government - they get enough tax as is and they can’t manage it. What things would you do with that ‘excess’ of wealth that you deem to be too much. What would you use it for? To improve peoples lives? Yours? Destroy peoples lives? Money is quite powerful.

So as opposed to thinking someone has too much to what you set the standard at, why not view what you would do? Billionaires hire millionaires. Millionaires hire ‘thousandaires’ and down it goes. Musk in this case hires thousands of people to run his companies. All those who work for him depend on him to pay their pay check so that they can eat, live, play, have a home etc. So in actuality, Musk is paying many mortgages through those who he has hired. That’s quite kind is it not? Providing a living for others so that they can live in a home and be able to go on vacation.

Personally, the gov takes in too much and there is very little accountability that they are held to. Businesses learn how to increase. The state just mooches more and more. Sadly, that most likely won’t change whatsoever in our life time.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by STAMPEDRED

Interesting statement.

How do you suppose that the funds over $1B should go to the state? What part of their piss-poor manangement of funds makes one think they should be given even more to manage?

Balance this with how many governments - any level - or even grander countries, are not in debt? Hi Ne can argue good debt and bad debt until the cows come home - regardless it’s debt. Means you owe and if something goes sour in that lender relationship who has control?

Point is: gov by and large across multiple levels mismanage funds all the time and run higher and higher debts/deficits. So in your estimation the government should receive bail money from others who have learned how to succeed and grow their wealth / finances in excess of $1B so they should be stopped from having too much.

Here’s a thought to at least consider:

No matter what one makes or earns, when you die you take Zero of it. So decide while alive what to do with the money made. Personally, I wouldn’t be for supporting government - they get enough tax as is and they can’t manage it. What things would you do with that ‘excess’ of wealth that you deem to be too much. What would you use it for? To improve peoples lives? Yours? Destroy peoples lives? Money is quite powerful.

So as opposed to thinking someone has too much to what you set the standard at, why not view what you would do? Billionaires hire millionaires. Millionaires hire ‘thousandaires’ and down it goes. Musk in this case hires thousands of people to run his companies. All those who work for him depend on him to pay their pay check so that they can eat, live, play, have a home etc. So in actuality, Musk is paying many mortgages through those who he has hired. That’s quite kind is it not? Providing a living for others so that they can live in a home and be able to go on vacation.

Personally, the gov takes in too much and there is very little accountability that they are held to. Businesses learn how to increase. The state just mooches more and more. Sadly, that most likely won’t change whatsoever in our life time.

Absolutely begging you to read a single article or book on the historical efficacy of trickle-down economics.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by STAMPEDRED

So as opposed to thinking someone has too much to what you set the standard at, why not view what you would do? Billionaires hire millionaires. Millionaires hire ‘thousandaires’ and down it goes. Musk in this case hires thousands of people to run his companies. All those who work for him depend on him to pay their pay check so that they can eat, live, play, have a home etc. So in actuality, Musk is paying many mortgages through those who he has hired. That’s quite kind is it not? Providing a living for others so that they can live in a home and be able to go on vacation.

This is a myopic way to look at people like Musk. He's not some father figure handing out money to his 'people'. His companies are successful because he's hiring the resources that make him successful. Scientists, sales, tech support, customer service, supply chain, HR, communications, etc.

So while no one can argue the success Musk has had, Telsa/Space X/Twitter only generates revenue because of the people who make it work, not the CEO himself.

Let's not pretend the billionaires are saving their employees. The employees are greasing the wheels for the billionaires because they're the ones in the trenches making things happen.

[GGG]

You have the flow of money wrong.

People perform labor which generates a surplus of value. A portion of that labour pays their mortgage a portion pays legacy labour for the capital, and a portion is harvested by the billionaire.

The billionaire doesn’t pay anyones mortgage the labour performed in past or present pats the billionaire.

A billionaire is a person who has identified a configuration of capital and labour to create a massive surplus. We currently over compensate people for coming up with that configuration.

[Wormius]

It’s an interesting topic, maybe instead of an inheritance tax, limit inheritance to some arbitrary figure and the rest goes to infrastructure / healthcare / social welfare spending.

[Matata]

[STAMPEDRED]

Originally Posted by GGG

You have the flow of money wrong.

People perform labor which generates a surplus of value. A portion of that labour pays their mortgage a portion pays legacy labour for the capital, and a portion is harvested by the billionaire.

The billionaire doesn’t pay anyones mortgage the labour performed in past or present pats the billionaire.

A billionaire is a person who has identified a configuration of capital and labour to create a massive surplus. We currently over compensate people for coming up with that configuration.

Still interesting in that if we have a surplus as you state, then don’t agree to work for the wage offered.

The billionaire absolutely does pay. Where do you think that money comes from that you received to live? He actually pays for everything you do. Did you earn it? Yes. Do you get the right to steward it and direct what it goes to each month? Yes. But that money came from his increase that you both agreed to that increased the companies abilities to perform a service(s) that people are willing to buy. Do you not recall ever asking for you it employer to talk to your bank to let them know that yes you do make enough each month working for them to prove you can pay that mortgage? Or even rent?

I don’t think many of you realize the pressure that comes on an employer when they realize they have to ensure the company increases or earns enough each month to pay *you* as you rely on them to give you a wage to cover your own debts you incurred.

Look at it this way. You can quit your job, and the money you earn from said billionaire or employer quits coming in. Now you scramble to find a way to replace that monthly income so you can pay your house. Who inadvertently was paying it for you?

The point is not all billionaires are bad, nor are all good. To think however that the state has anyones best interest in mind is ludicrous and to fund the beast even more when they have shown zero capability to steward what they already bring in none of us would agree is a wise decision.

That’s the main point. Scream people make too much all you want. The solution offered is ludicrous. It’s like Ontarios last premier coming to alberta to scold us for how we manage our provincial funds when she receives Billions from our province and is in even more debt than alberta. Living off of welfare shows the lack of stewardship Ontario has as a province. And you want billionaires to give more money to the state? Look after your own affairs first before asking for more handouts. Sadly, every generation by and large shows they are terrible stewards. The state absolutely should not get the idea of excess wealth 100% of whatever is made over $1B.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by STAMPEDRED

Interesting statement.

How do you suppose that the funds over $1B should go to the state? What part of their piss-poor manangement of funds makes one think they should be given even more to manage?

Balance this with how many governments - any level - or even grander countries, are not in debt? Hi Ne can argue good debt and bad debt until the cows come home - regardless it’s debt. Means you owe and if something goes sour in that lender relationship who has control?

Point is: gov by and large across multiple levels mismanage funds all the time and run higher and higher debts/deficits. So in your estimation the government should receive bail money from others who have learned how to succeed and grow their wealth / finances in excess of $1B so they should be stopped from having too much.

Here’s a thought to at least consider:

No matter what one makes or earns, when you die you take Zero of it. So decide while alive what to do with the money made. Personally, I wouldn’t be for supporting government - they get enough tax as is and they can’t manage it. What things would you do with that ‘excess’ of wealth that you deem to be too much. What would you use it for? To improve peoples lives? Yours? Destroy peoples lives? Money is quite powerful.

So as opposed to thinking someone has too much to what you set the standard at, why not view what you would do? Billionaires hire millionaires. Millionaires hire ‘thousandaires’ and down it goes. Musk in this case hires thousands of people to run his companies. All those who work for him depend on him to pay their pay check so that they can eat, live, play, have a home etc. So in actuality, Musk is paying many mortgages through those who he has hired. That’s quite kind is it not? Providing a living for others so that they can live in a home and be able to go on vacation.

Personally, the gov takes in too much and there is very little accountability that they are held to. Businesses learn how to increase. The state just mooches more and more. Sadly, that most likely won’t change whatsoever in our life time.

I couldn't have described Neoliberal ideals any better myself.

[D as in David]

Musk is on his way to becoming a government based on his mismanaging the funds he used to purchase Twitter.