Should Billionaires Exist?

[Dans La Lune]

Good video. When I get home from work later, I'll start a thread on it, and I'll address every claim he makes.

You should also start a thread debunking vaccines while you're at it. Complete the package.

 

[aociswundumho]

You should also start a thread debunking vaccines while you're at it. Complete the package.

Nothing wrong with vaccines. Plenty wrong with letting the state inject chemicals into people's bodies against their will - something an extreme collectivist like you seems to enjoy a little too much.

 

[Dans La Lune]

Nothing wrong with vaccines. Plenty wrong with letting the state inject chemicals into people's bodies against their will - something an extreme collectivist like you seems to enjoy a little too much.

You can be an individualist in the jungle or on a private island. Society and civilization have certain requirements to function. You don't have a right to partake of the fruits of civilization without sharing in those requirements.

Be a Typhoid Gary somewhere else.

 

[Dans La Lune]

The irony is that @aociswundumho would immediately fire all the subject matter experts who make vaccine policy safe and effective. He prefers the RFK approach.

 

[jaypatriot]

"A new report released by Senator Bernie Sanders, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP), details a coordinated effort by right-wing billionaires to undermine, dismantle, and privatize the American public education system. The report, published on June 25, 2024, identifies a decade-long campaign where wealthy individuals and their affiliated organizations are funding initiatives to promote private school vouchers, advocate for education segregation, and push for the abolition of the U.S. Department of Education.

The report highlights that state funding for public elementary and secondary schools has increased by only 1% per year on average over the past decade after adjusting for inflation, while state spending on tax breaks and subsidies for private schools has surged by 408%, amounting to $7 billion. This shift in funding has led to significant financial strain on public education systems, with Arizona's universal private school voucher program costing 983% more than initially projected in its first year. The report estimates that the funds spent on these vouchers could instead be used to hire tens of thousands of additional public school teachers, hire school counselors, raise wages for child care providers, or significantly increase investment in career and technical education.

Key figures and organizations identified in the report include the DeVos family, whose foundation funds the American Federation for Children (AFC), which spent $9 million to influence state elections and remove lawmakers opposing voucher programs. The Bradley Foundation and the Koch Foundation are also cited as major funders, with the Bradley Foundation spending $7.5 million in 2022 to support state affiliates of the State Policy Network and $8.3 million to build a youth movement. Other billionaires named include Jess Yass, Richard Uihlein, and Bernard Marcus, who have donated to the School Freedom Fund, a PAC supporting voucher programs and the elimination of the Department of Education."

NEWS: New Report on the Coordinated Effort by Billionaires to Dismantle the American Public School System » Senator Bernie Sanders

WASHINGTON, June 25 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) today released a new report detailing the coordinated and growing effort to undermine, dismantle, and privatize the American public education system. This report...

www.sanders.senate.gov

Good copy and paste job on your part.

This is what I am in favor of:
"a decade-long campaign where wealthy individuals and their affiliated organizations are funding initiatives to promote private school vouchers, advocate for education segregation, and push for the abolition of the U.S. Department of Education."

Why do you believe wealthy individuals want to promote school vouchers?
What no one wants to say out loud is:
"Get the promising students out of a public school environment where there are bad elements in public schools that don't give a shit about getting a good education but enjoy disrupting an education for others who want to learn."
If politicians said that out loud, they could lose votes from people who still believe the stranglehold teachers unions have on public education is a good thing.

 

[Fledermaus]

Capitalism creates those conditions. People don't chose to be homeless drug addicts in a vacuum.

So there are no homeless drug addicts in non capitalist nations....

North Korea I can believe.

 

[NatMorton]

And the consolidation of government power is inherently right-wing.

How do you reconcile that with small government conservatism?

 

[Dans La Lune]

How do you reconcile that with small government conservatism?

The right-wing want a government so small that it effectively becomes a single person: a dictator. Minoritarian rule of the elites.

More broadly, the right-wing want a small government so that business interests usurp the functions of a democratic government, which serves the hierarchy they are ideologically committed to. Corporate rule is a form of consolidated power. That is certainly what @aociswundumho champions under the guise of being anti-government. It's not actually anti-government, though. It's anti-democratic government. Notice how literally all of his positions favor giving more power to business interests and the wealthy elite. Commodifying life and undermining labor power.

And when it comes to government, it truly is Zero Sum. Think of it like a balloon that is squeezed on one end, with the other side inflating in proportion. You shrink democratic government, you increase the size of minoritarian rule. You're not actually shrinking government, you're shifting the role of government and what it serves.

 

[Dans La Lune]

Good copy and paste job on your part.

Thanks.

This is what I am in favor of:
"a decade-long campaign where wealthy individuals and their affiliated organizations are funding initiatives to promote private school vouchers, advocate for education segregation, and push for the abolition of the U.S. Department of Education."

Why do you believe wealthy individuals want to promote school vouchers?

I already addressed this.

 

[NatMorton]

The right-wing want a government so small that it effectively becomes a single person: a dictator. Minoritarian rule of the elites.

More broadly, the right-wing want a small government so that business interests usurp the functions of a democratic government, which serves the hierarchy they are ideologically committed to. Corporate rule is a form of consolidated power. That is certainly what @aociswundumho champions under the guise of being anti-government. It's not actually anti-government, though. It's anti-democratic government. Notice how literally all of his positions favor giving more power to business interests and the wealthy elite. Commodifying life and undermining labor power.

And when it comes to government, it truly is Zero Sum. Think of it like a balloon that is squeezed on end, with the other side inflating in proportion. You shrink democratic government, you increase the size of minoritarian rule. You're not actually shrinking government, you're shifting the role of government and what it serves.

So if I understand your thinking, you're saying there's a fixed level of authority that exists in a society, and if government doesn't have every measure of it, something worse will?

 

[The Brad Dad]

How do you reconcile that with small government conservatism?

Easy: there's no such thing. At least not practiced int his country at any point in the last 50ish years or probably more.

 

[Dans La Lune]

So if I understand your thinking, you're saying there's a fixed level of authority that exists in a society, and if government doesn't have every measure of it, something worse will?

Whether the power of government is exactly static is less important than the nature of government and the fact that it is essential for society. Without some form of governing structure there's anarchy. There is no society under such conditions, nor could there be. That's basic stuff.

If you shrink regulations and laws (how government interacts with business interests), and remove all forms of accountability, what do you think happens? Those with the most resources will accumulate more and more resources and control over those resources. Those with the most control over resources will become the most politically powerful. The only alternative is a monarchy, where the population believes that certain families have divine blood and thus adhere to a system where authority is invested in bloodlines.

Me? I opt for a government of the people, by the people. The less consolidated power the better for the average person.

 

[jaypatriot]

Thanks.



I already addressed this.

That was an effective video. Thankfully, it was only a minute long since I would never listen to a Leftist/Socialist message longer than two minutes.
The messenger is not wrong with his summation.Rich people do not need a $10K voucher to send their kids to a private school. It is icing on the cake not needed by already fat parents.
The middle class parent has to decide whether they can afford the annual tuition on top of the $10K voucher they received. What else is new? Parents always have to debate the cost of schools they want to send their kids to. The same thinking goes into buying a car or a house or a family vacation.
As far as private schools rejecting certain students, if I had a private school and wanted good students to attend, I would screen out those students not only with lousy grades but also those who displayed disciplinary problems in the schools they attended. Why take the chance and give my private school a bad name because of a rotten apple allowed to ruin my school's reputation?
That's what an employer does if he/she encounters an applicant who cannot communicate properly or who has a tainted employment record after being vetted by the investigating employer.

 

[Dans La Lune]

That was an effective video. Thankfully, it was only a minute long since I would never listen to a Leftist/Socialist message longer than two minutes.
The messenger is not wrong with his summation.Rich people do not need a $10K voucher to send their kids to a private school. It is icing on the cake not needed by already fat parents.
The middle class parent has to decide whether they can afford the annual tuition on top of the $10K voucher they received. What else is new? Parents always have to debate the cost of schools they want to send their kids to. The same thinking goes into buying a car or a house or a family vacation.
As far as private schools rejecting certain students, if I had a private school and wanted good students to attend, I would screen out those students not only with lousy grades but also those who displayed disciplinary problems in the schools they attended. Why take the chance and give my private school a bad name because of a rotten apple allowed to ruin my school's reputation?
That's what an employer does if he/she encounters an applicant who cannot communicate properly or who has a tainted employment record after being vetted by the investigating employer.

So much for equality of opportunity.

 

[jaypatriot]

So much for equality of opportunity.

Everyone has an opportunity to be rich in this country.
If you don't take advantage of opportunities in the freest country in the world, then you only have yourself to blame. And don't give me that b****hit arguments about systemic racism. Tell that to the rich Indians, Chinese, and other well-to-do Asians in this country. They're not white and they are getting wealthier every year.

Why are millions of illegals in this country looking to provide for their families and send money back to relatives in their shithole countries?
Because they like our weather?

 

[Cosmo]

The medic and the PA. I was too busy screaming to take part in the conversation.

You just said "I understand precisely how opiate addiction happens. As a result, I won't take opiates," which sounds like YOU made the decision.

 

[Cosmo]

Capitalism creates those conditions. People don't chose to be homeless drug addicts in a vacuum.

It's capitalism's fault they decided to get stoned daily, all day long?

 

[Dans La Lune]

Is the average American 8x richer than they were in the 1990s?

 

[cpwill]

So if I understand your thinking, you're saying there's a fixed level of authority that exists in a society, and if government doesn't have every measure of it, something worse will?

IIRC there's a study out there somewhere to the effect that, the more authoritarian someone of a left ward leaning bent is, the less they are able to recognize it.

 

[NatMorton]

Whether the power of government is exactly static is less important than the nature of government and the fact that it is essential for society. Without some form of governing structure there's anarchy. There is no society under such conditions, nor could there be. That's basic stuff.

If you shrink regulations and laws (how government interacts with business interests), and remove all forms of accountability, what do you think happens? Those with the most resources will accumulate more and more resources and control over those resources. Those with the most control over resources will become the most politically powerful. The only alternative is a monarchy, where the population believes that certain families have divine blood and thus adhere to a system where authority is invested in bloodlines.

Me? I opt for a government of the people, by the people. The less consolidated power the better for the average person.

Your argument seems to be there nothing between anarchy and government holding all the power.

No thank you.

 

[NatMorton]

IIRC there's a study out there somewhere to the effect that, the more authoritarian someone of a left ward leaning bent is, the less they are able to recognize it.

I'm not at all surprised. Power corrupts.

Our friends on the left can't see what's in front of their faces. They want government to have the power to control so many facets of our lives, and then they panic when someone like Trump begins wielding that power.

 

[Loulit01]

I don't have a problem with people worth a few billion. But a some point mega-wealth is destructive. Too much power is wielded by too few people.

Elon Musk could give one billion dollars to every man, woman, and child in the United States and remain a billionaire. That's a recipe for disaster.

 

[CLAX1911]

I voted other I don't care.

 

[NatMorton]

I don't have a problem with people worth a few billion. But a some point mega-wealth is destructive. Too much power is wielded by too few people.

Elon Musk could give one billion dollars to every man, woman, and child in the United States and remain a billionaire. That's a recipe for disaster.

Your math is more than a little off. He could give a billion to about 400 people. In fact, if the government confiscated his entire net worth it would reduce annual deficit by about 25% for only a single year.

 

[Loulit01]

Your math is more than a little off. He could give a billion to about 400 people. In fact, if the government confiscated his entire net worth it would reduce annual deficit by about 25% for only a single year.

Yes, sorry, that was a middle of a sleepless night port.

The point is wealth of this type results in more and more power in the hands of fewer and fewer people.