Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-21-2020, 04:11 PM
contradancer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Maine, Germany
Posts: 134

Strange thing to criticize as a character fault


I'm not rich, but I've always thought of this country as being a place to grow rich if you are so inclined. Why are slings and arrows being thrown at Bloomberg for being wealthy? I'm glad for one since he could hopefully go into office not owing anyone. Trump has his wealth handed to him. Trump is an ignorant, arrogant, dangerous, beast busily building up a cadre of criminals who owe him, for the future. He is one of the scariest people that exists and there are people who support his behavior. Who they are I assume are those completely ignorant of the consequences or those who are covering their own hehinds. Some women would like to F**k him because they are attracted to buffoons like that, but I hope to god that is a small number. I will vote for Bloomberg because I think he is the only one who can beat Trump. The other candidates are lovely people with good skills, experience and motivations and would be worthy of consideration, but they cannot beat Trump. Also, I will never vote for anyone who wants to take away my private health insurance. Just look at Canada.
__________________
Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.
Steven Weinberg

Last edited by contradancer; 02-21-2020 at 04:13 PM.
  #2  
Old 02-21-2020, 04:24 PM
Thudlow Boink's Avatar
Thudlow Boink is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Lincoln, IL
Posts: 28,665
Have you seen the thread on The myth of the businessman-President?
Quote:
Originally Posted by contradancer View Post
Just look at Canada.
What about Canada?
  #3  
Old 02-21-2020, 04:29 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 27,768
1) There's a common belief that billionaires got their money by stomping all over their employees and/or customers. If you read even cursory biographies of John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, J.P. Morgan, or Donald Trump for that matter, you'll find there's more than a grain of truth behind that belief.

2) When you talk about "your" private health insurance, is it all yours, or something your employer provides as part of your compensation. How much would you pay for a health insurance policy that isn't subsidized by your employer. What if you lost your job tomorrow? What if - like my daughter and daughter in law - no insurance company would sell you health insurance prior to the hated Obamacare, because you had something called a pre-existing condition?

3) Four more years of Donald Trump, or a Democratic candidate who isn't named Mike Bloomberg. Who's the bigger threat?
  #4  
Old 02-21-2020, 04:31 PM
Broomstick's Avatar
Broomstick is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 30,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by contradancer View Post
I'm not rich, but I've always thought of this country as being a place to grow rich if you are so inclined. Why are slings and arrows being thrown at Bloomberg for being wealthy?
The have-nots often do not trust the haves.

Why would I trust Bloomberg (or any other individual candidate) to have my best interests at heart?

There is also a deep, abiding hatred towards him for the "stop-and-frisk" business, which often turned into "stop brown men and arrest them for things no one else gets arrested for and hold them for long periods of time by setting the bail so high they can't raise it".

Quote:
Originally Posted by contradancer View Post
I'm glad for one since he could hopefully go into office not owing anyone.
I sometimes wonder if the "billionaire class" saw that there was enough anti-Trump feeling that one of those other folks might actually get in and Bloomberg entered the race to make sure no uppity peons got notions... but that's really paranoid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by contradancer View Post
The other candidates are lovely people with good skills, experience and motivations and would be worthy of consideration, but they cannot beat Trump.
Well, gosh, then we should just have a minimum wealth requirement before you can run for public office, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by contradancer View Post
Also, I will never vote for anyone who wants to take away my private health insurance. Just look at Canada.
You mean... where absolutely no one goes bankrupt due to medical bills?

Where everyone has equal access to the same medical care regardless of whether they are a billionaire or not?

Where no one ever has to worry about pre-existing conditions, co-pays, coverage caps, or exclusions?

When you turn 65 are you planning to keep that private insurance you're so fond of or go on Medicare like everyone else?
  #5  
Old 02-21-2020, 04:40 PM
Thudlow Boink's Avatar
Thudlow Boink is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Lincoln, IL
Posts: 28,665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broomstick View Post
You mean... where absolutely no one goes bankrupt due to medical bills?

Where everyone has equal access to the same medical care regardless of whether they are a billionaire or not?

Where no one ever has to worry about pre-existing conditions, co-pays, coverage caps, or exclusions?
And where your health insurance isn't tied to your job, so that if you lose your job or look for a different job, you don't have to worry about losing that sweet sweet private health insurance?
  #6  
Old 02-21-2020, 07:06 PM
steatopygia's Avatar
steatopygia is offline
Experimental FOC Test Pilot
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: North Idaho mostly
Posts: 2,166
Let's talk about the reality regarding Canadian healthcare. I work very near the Canadian border and frequently take care of Canadians who have injured themselves skiing. If their injury is non-emergent enough that they can return home for treatment, they are very happy. Very Happy. They don't have to try and navigate the over priced and only average care that is American healthcare.

Last edited by steatopygia; 02-21-2020 at 07:10 PM.
  #7  
Old 02-21-2020, 08:20 PM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 32,213
Try reading Can Canadians Purchase Private Health Insurance Coverage?. Yes, it's from some icky liberal site, but is worth a look nonetheless because it's as even-handed as a good newspaper article.

Billionaires in today's world tend to share the complex that making gobs of money in one endeavor proves that they are universally capable. The opposite seems to be truer: they are usually one-dimensionally capable and out of their depth in other spheres. They also share the universal notion that their billions absolve them from any faults and deficiencies. Trump just bellows over those; Bloomberg is visibly furious whenever a critic brings his up.

On the other side, the common people want to believe that winning the Presidency is the result of hard work and broad popular acclaim, not merely the effect of spending millions on ads. I.e., other people are so dumb as to be influenced by ads: they are above such trivialities. Nonsense, but some similar sentiment underlies all the comments I've read.

Besides, liberals are already hysterical over the imaginary possibility that Trump will stay in office forever. Bloomberg actually had the rules changed to allow him a third term. He's like a competent Trump in many ways. Shouldn't that give you nightmares?
  #8  
Old 02-21-2020, 11:46 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
I also am annoyed by the antipathy many liberals have against the super-rich. Where does it come from? It confirms one of the stereotypic slurs that right-wingers use against the left.

Many billionaires including Bloomberg have pledged to give at least half their assets to charity.

@ Bloomberg detractors: Have YOU made such a pledge?

The idea that this man, who has pledged to give away another $25 billion, is running for President to save himself form a $2 billion wealth tax (that isn't happening anyway) is so STUPID, I ask defenders of that stupidity to take it to the Pit.

Are there billionaires and millionaires who are GREEDY assholes? Absolutely!! Are there small businessmen barely able to make ends meet who are also greedy asshooles? YES!
  #9  
Old 02-22-2020, 01:26 AM
Bryan Ekers's Avatar
Bryan Ekers is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 59,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by contradancer View Post
Just look at Canada.
Go on....
  #10  
Old 02-22-2020, 02:49 AM
DWMarch is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Nanaimo, BC
Posts: 2,192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thudlow Boink View Post
And where your health insurance isn't tied to your job, so that if you lose your job or look for a different job, you don't have to worry about losing that sweet sweet private health insurance?
Canada has private insurance that supplements the basics if one is lucky enough to find a job that offers this (and anything in the service industry does not offer this). If I lost my job, a medication I take every day would go from being $1.50 per month to $111.00 per month. I would also lose dental coverage and vision coverage and both of those things are absurdly expensive without the help of private insurance.

I also live in a city where I cannot switch doctors because every single doctor has too many patients already. If I go to the clinic and I am not the very first one through the door I will be waiting a long time to see any doctor. And if I go to the hospital because the clinic has closed early (which happens often), I am now at the intentionally-worst clinic in town where I will wait four hours at a minimum.

Don't get me wrong, I would not trade it for the American system. In the American system I would be dead. But while Canada's system isn't going to bankrupt anyone, it's still far from perfect.
  #11  
Old 02-22-2020, 04:38 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
OP asks us to stop considering billionaires automatically evil. Everyone starts talking about health insurance. Should OP go find a health insurance thread if he wants to talk about billionaires?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase View Post
Billionaires in today's world tend to share the complex that making gobs of money in one endeavor proves that they are universally capable. The opposite seems to be truer: they are usually one-dimensionally capable and out of their depth in other spheres.
Uhh ... cite? Self-made billionaires are generally intelligent, have strong drive and organizational skills, and may have "people skills" and attention to detail — all attributes that might lead to success in other fields including governance.

Are good singers likely to make good athletes? Probably not. But while correlation between skills at business and governance isn't unity, it's far more than zero.

Temperament is as relevant as skills. The best politicians are compassionate and motivated by a desire to perform public service. But many billionaires turn to public service when their wealth is already huge: George Soros is a good example, although he doesn't run for office personally.

And note that many billionaires — including Soros, Bloomberg, Buffett — are on record calling for higher taxes on billionaires.

The huge concentration of wealth among a small number of people is a symptom that America's economic paradigm has flaws. Call the system evil if you wish, but that doesn't make the individual billionaires evil.

Please don't use Trump as counterexample for any of this: He's NOT self-made, NOT a particularly good businessman; used criminality both for his real estate ventures and for his White House; and exhibits the same nastiness and and narcissism in both spheres.

Quote:
They also share the universal notion that their billions absolve them from any faults and deficiencies. Trump just bellows over those; Bloomberg is visibly furious whenever a critic brings his up.
I do not blame Bloomberg for being annoyed when having to put up with the "billionaires are always bad" mentality we see on exhibit.

Bloomberg is an old man who is performing an act of altruism. He hopes he can rescue the U.S.A. from this Trumpian nightmare, and has promised to keep up the big spending even if not the nominee. Regardless of how his campaign progresses, he deserves applause.
  #12  
Old 02-22-2020, 04:44 AM
Broomstick's Avatar
Broomstick is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 30,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Many billionaires including Bloomberg have pledged to give at least half their assets to charity.

@ Bloomberg detractors: Have YOU made such a pledge?
No, because doing so would leave me homeless and thus is irresponsible.

Size of the fortune counts.

Bloomberg could give away 90% or even more of his assets before he had to worry about living in a van down by the river.

Me, I give to charitable causes a portion of my income that will not result in me requiring others' charity.

What's your next strawman?
  #13  
Old 02-22-2020, 05:01 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broomstick View Post
No, because doing so would leave me homeless and thus is irresponsible.

Size of the fortune counts.

Bloomberg could give away 90% or even more of his assets before he had to worry about living in a van down by the river.

Me, I give to charitable causes a portion of my income that will not result in me requiring others' charity.

What's your next strawman?
Everything you write is obvious, and, yes, I could/should have omitted the silly snark when mentioning Bloomberg's huge charity.

Yet you seize on the single sentence I should have omitted and completely ignore (are unable to refute?) all nine paragraphs of my most recent post. Who is it that needs to attack strawmen?
  #14  
Old 02-22-2020, 05:03 AM
Broomstick's Avatar
Broomstick is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 30,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Uhh ... cite? Self-made billionaires are generally intelligent, have strong drive and organizational skills, and may have "people skills" and attention to detail — all attributes that might lead to success in other fields including governance.
I actually knew a "self-made" billionaire. He supported my late spouse's business ventures (that's what he did in "retirement" - help entrepreneurs. And by "know" I mean he invited us into his home as guests and friends).

He would (and did) freely admit that a good dose of his wealth was due to luck (at one point he bought into a tiny company no one had ever heard of called "Microsoft" - the guy had actually supported entrepreneurs for decades before we met him). Of course, keeping the money and making it grow could be credited to good business skills, but honest folks will admit that luck plays a role and the real trick is being able to recognize and take advantage of that luck when it comes. Which is where the hard work and self-drive comes into play.

So yes, the guy was an actuary which means super strong math skills, and he was organized and self-disciplined... but without that stroke of luck - investing in the right place at the right time for something that exploded in importance - he might have been "just" a millionaire instead of the sort of wealth that starts with a "b" instead of an "m".

Likewise with quite a few other super-rich people who, yes, might have had amazing athletic talent or artistic talent or business talent but not only had the hard work, discipline, and focus to be successful but also were able to spot opportunity and go after it - they saw their "lucky break" and used it. Meanwhile, there are millions of talented, focused, self-disciplined people who, although successful on one level, never have and never will get that "lucky break" that will propel them into the stratosphere.

If I could, I would dispel the myth that being super-rich means you're superior, better, or more worthy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Temperament is as relevant as skills. The best politicians are compassionate and motivated by a desire to perform public service.
True. Pity we don't have more of them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
And note that many billionaires — including Soros, Bloomberg, Buffett — are on record calling for higher taxes on billionaires.
Which is about the only thing that makes Bloomberg tolerable in my view.

Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
I do not blame Bloomberg for being annoyed when having to put up with the "billionaires are always bad" mentality we see on exhibit.
Yeah, it's like the "retail workers are always stupid" meme I have to put up with at work. Or like the sexism/racism/ageism/other -isms we all have to put up with.

There are bad billionaires out there. The "billionaire community" has to deal with that fact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Bloomberg is an old man who is performing an act of altruism. He hopes he can rescue the U.S.A. from this Trumpian nightmare, and has promised to keep up the big spending even if not the nominee. Regardless of how his campaign progresses, he deserves applause.
I can agree with that while reserving the right to view him with the same scrutiny and suspicion I view anyone asking for my vote.
  #15  
Old 02-22-2020, 05:04 AM
Broomstick's Avatar
Broomstick is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 30,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Everything you write is obvious, and, yes, I could/should have omitted the silly snark when mentioning Bloomberg's huge charity.

Yet you seize on the single sentence I should have omitted and completely ignore (are unable to refute?) all nine paragraphs of my most recent post. Who is it that needs to attack strawmen?
Um... see my following post?

It does take me a few minutes to bang out a few paragraphs, a few more if I actually put some thought into it.
  #16  
Old 02-22-2020, 06:21 AM
pool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Inside
Posts: 4,990
Billionaires depending how you define bubble, probably live in the smallest bubble it's possible to live in, is it bigoted or prejudiced to think that a billionaire won't care about the working man, yes it is, but I think it's a safe bet.

I also see autocratic traits in Bloomberg in light of his past support of stop and frisk and his nanny state policies.

I also don't see Bloomberg in an altruistic light trying to save us from Trump, I see it as him saying "Hey if one billionaire can become president, that means I can too!" I think it's more for his ego than anything else.
__________________
"You can do anything you set your mind to...But money helps"

Last edited by pool; 02-22-2020 at 06:23 AM.
  #17  
Old 02-22-2020, 06:32 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broomstick View Post
Um... see my following post?

It does take me a few minutes to bang out a few paragraphs, a few more if I actually put some thought into it.
So, it seems we're largely in agreement, except for my bit of stupid snark which I regret and retract. Friends?

Anyway, I'm no Bloomy Brat. I want whoever can beat Trump, but can't decide who that is.

And my pessimism is overwhelming. Even if a D wins the White House, Moscow Mitch will control the Senate. That, plus the problems likely to surface 2021-2022 due to Trump's bad stewardship, plus intraparty bickering among the D's, plus continued malice and lies from the Putin-GOP axis, may lead to a resurgence of the Evildoers' Party.
  #18  
Old 02-22-2020, 11:18 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 37,276
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Are there billionaires and millionaires who are GREEDY assholes? Absolutely!! Are there small businessmen barely able to make ends meet who are also greedy asshooles? YES!
Yes, but one has to be greedy to become a "self-made billionaire" while one does not to become a small businessman. You have to value money as a thing to acquire rather than as just something to get you what you need or even want. It's just orders of magnitude beyond what would happen if you were just good at business but didn't constantly feel the need to make more. (And self-made means they didn't inherit the wealth or get it through luck alone.)

Is it possible that a billionaire might have enough good qualities to overcome that flaw? Sure, though I can't think of any offhand (though, to be fair, I don't know of a lot of billionaires). Are there some that did some bad things in the past but are working to make up for it now? I would tentatively put Bill Gates in that list.

But it's an uphill battle because of what it means to have acquired so much wealth in one lifetime. It tells us about your priorities and values. And those priorities and values are not generally the same ones that those of us who see the current wealth system as flawed actually have.

Throw in that Bloomberg seems to be the most right-leaning centrist candidate, and of course I'm going to oppose him. There's no way such a person could have made up for their greed in my eyes.

Then there are the rape/sexual harassment allegations, which really don't help.

Last edited by BigT; 02-22-2020 at 11:19 AM.
  #19  
Old 02-22-2020, 11:35 AM
Miller's Avatar
Miller is offline
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 44,948
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Everything you write is obvious, and, yes, I could/should have omitted the silly snark when mentioning Bloomberg's huge charity.

Yet you seize on the single sentence I should have omitted and completely ignore (are unable to refute?) all nine paragraphs of my most recent post. Who is it that needs to attack strawmen?
Calling out dumb stuff that you actually said isn’t attacking a straw man.
  #20  
Old 02-22-2020, 12:07 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by contradancer View Post
I'm not rich, but I've always thought of this country as being a place to grow rich if you are so inclined. Why are slings and arrows being thrown at Bloomberg for being wealthy? I'm glad for one since he could hopefully go into office not owing anyone. Trump has his wealth handed to him. Trump is an ignorant, arrogant, dangerous, beast busily building up a cadre of criminals who owe him, for the future. He is one of the scariest people that exists and there are people who support his behavior. Who they are I assume are those completely ignorant of the consequences or those who are covering their own hehinds. Some women would like to F**k him because they are attracted to buffoons like that, but I hope to god that is a small number. I will vote for Bloomberg because I think he is the only one who can beat Trump. The other candidates are lovely people with good skills, experience and motivations and would be worthy of consideration, but they cannot beat Trump. Also, I will never vote for anyone who wants to take away my private health insurance. Just look at Canada.
Can you cite liberals calling it a character fault to be rich?

Can you criticize the financial system structurally without impugning people?

How did "character" even come into it?
  #21  
Old 02-22-2020, 12:40 PM
Little Nemo is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 85,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by contradancer View Post
I'm not rich, but I've always thought of this country as being a place to grow rich if you are so inclined. Why are slings and arrows being thrown at Bloomberg for being wealthy?
Many people feel that it's not true that anyone can become rich if they want to. The reality in America is that a lot of people are rich not due to any effort of their own but because they were born in a wealthy family. This runs against the American sense of fair play; they feel that people shouldn't have a lifelong advantage due to accident of birth.

Some people admittedly go beyond that. They take opposition to unearned wealth and project it into opposition to all wealth.
  #22  
Old 02-22-2020, 01:13 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,909
"Absolute power corrupts absolutely"

Does the above quote impugn the character of the absolutely powerful?
  #23  
Old 02-22-2020, 02:19 PM
guizot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: An East Hollywood dingbat
Posts: 9,031

Strange thing to criticize as a character fault


Bloomberg's character fault is not that he's rich, but that apparently he expects to just get his way for whatever he wants without involving others in the process. This happens with many--though not all--rich people.

That kind of attitude and approach doesn't work well for good governance, (just look at Trump).
  #24  
Old 02-22-2020, 02:29 PM
JKellyMap's Avatar
JKellyMap is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 10,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by guizot View Post
Bloomberg's character fault is not that he's rich, but that apparently he expects to just get his way for whatever he wants without involving others in the process. This happens with many--though not all--rich people.

That kind of attitude and approach doesn't work well for good governance, (just look at Trump).
Funny you should say that. IMHO, one of Bloomberg’s better moments in the debate was when he said how he understands the value of working in teams, rather than making unilateral decisions. I could be naive, but it really sounded like he was pretty good at that, and he cited his successful business experiences (in contrast to Trump’s) as tied to this.
  #25  
Old 02-22-2020, 02:32 PM
Manwich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Japan
Posts: 465
Wealth comes from work, so anyone who has a billion dollars has stolen from workers.

It's not possible to do a billion dollars worth of work.
  #26  
Old 02-22-2020, 02:38 PM
contradancer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Maine, Germany
Posts: 134
I'm talking about the last debate, not in general.
__________________
Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.
Steven Weinberg
  #27  
Old 02-22-2020, 04:01 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manwich View Post
Wealth comes from work, so anyone who has a billion dollars has stolen from workers.

It's not possible to do a billion dollars worth of work.
You commie you
  #28  
Old 02-22-2020, 04:10 PM
Larry Borgia's Avatar
Larry Borgia is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 10,976
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manwich View Post
Wealth comes from work, so anyone who has a billion dollars has stolen from workers.

It's not possible to do a billion dollars worth of work.
Wealth does not come from work--seriously, this has been discredited many times--a person who has a Billion dollars has a good or service worth, well, a billion dollars. It is possible to sell a billion dollars worth of stuff.
  #29  
Old 02-23-2020, 03:31 PM
Pantastic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,846
Anyone who has a billion dollars has acquired it by inheritance, stealing, or force, and all billionaires are parasites on the economy. There is simply no individual who has legitimately done something worth that amount of money, in all cases their profits rely on taking the fruits of someone else's labor. And billionaires don't just possess their ill-gotten gains; they spend a great deal of effort pushing for laws to help them keep grasping their hoards, to keep workers from getting their share of profits (Bloomberg is very anti-union, for example), and to keep tax shelters and tax cuts going so they can keep it. They're really like a dragon sitting on a vast horde of coins that doesn't have any use for the piles of treasure, but is willing to strike you down if you think that money should do anything but serve as a bed for their ego.

And what's worse, they hoard this pointlessly immense wealth not while people are just living ordinary lives around them, but while people are dying or miserable from easily treated medical conditions, suffering from simple hunger, or working multiple jobs just to stay functional. While people like Boomberg sit around gloating over their vast ledger sheet, there are poor kids being shamed and threatened with foster care for accumulating 'school lunch debt' and people dropping dead because they can't afford insulin. Flint, Michigan still doesn't have drinkable water. Most of people suffering PTSD from being assaulted by police under his stop and frisk policies can't afford treatment. The kind of person who lays around on a hoard of wealth while children are laboring to attempt to pay for lunches for other children and people make gofundme accounts just to survive is just not a good person.

Bloomberg's offer to give away half of his money really underscores just how awful billionaires are. Imagine you picked a random person and gave them a vast sum of money, enough to live the rest of their days in complete luxury (servants preparing meals and cleaning your multiple mansions, vacations wherever you want in a yacht, health care, and so on), and also added a vault that was just packed with a ton of even more money that they'd never be able to actually spend even while throwing wild parties and bathing in champagne. How many of them do you think would cling desperately to the vault, and how many do you think would start using the money that is completely meaningless to their lifestyle to help people? And the fact that he's only doing it for publicity makes it even worse in my book - he could have given to charity at any time before he decided to run for president, so he's not even doing it out of any kind of desire to health people, but instead for pure personal gain.
  #30  
Old 02-23-2020, 04:05 PM
steatopygia's Avatar
steatopygia is offline
Experimental FOC Test Pilot
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: North Idaho mostly
Posts: 2,166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manwich View Post
Wealth comes from work, so anyone who has a billion dollars has stolen from workers.

It's not possible to do a billion dollars worth of work.
But it is possible to have an idea or an invention worth a billion dollars.
  #31  
Old 02-23-2020, 05:09 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by steatopygia View Post
But it is possible to have an idea or an invention worth a billion dollars.
What if I had an invention that was worth 100 trillion dollars.

Is that all derived from me?

Should it all go to me?

Depending on the numbers it can change. A society doesn't have to incorporate someone who will bankrupt or hurt that society.

How many people do we have right now that can "hurt society" vs say, 20 years ago?
  #32  
Old 02-24-2020, 12:32 PM
Pantastic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by steatopygia View Post
But it is possible to have an idea or an invention worth a billion dollars.
Never seen any evidence of this - can you provide a cite for a company, agency, individual, or whatever signing a contract to pay someone a billion dollars for an idea? "Billion dollar ideas" involve an awful lot of other people actually doing work, the use of an awful lot of general public infrastructure, and especially the use of laws and the court system to actually go from 'idea' to 'billion dollars'.
  #33  
Old 02-24-2020, 10:20 PM
guizot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: An East Hollywood dingbat
Posts: 9,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKellyMap View Post
Funny you should say that. IMHO, one of Bloomberg’s better moments in the debate was when he said how he understands the value of working in teams, rather than making unilateral decisions. I could be naive, but it really sounded like he was pretty good at that, and he cited his successful business experiences (in contrast to Trump’s) as tied to this.
It's true that he has created coalitions beyond his own organizations, (U.S. mayors for climate change, etc.), but what I mean is that within his own operations--the presidential campaign being an example--it seems that he thinks the only buy-in necessary to get things done is of the monetary type--he doesn't need ideas from anyone else. In that sense, he's kind of "transactional" in the way the Trump is. The difference, it seems to me, is that Bloomberg gives credit to others and recognizes the need for their contributions more than Trump.
  #34  
Old 02-24-2020, 10:23 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
Never seen any evidence of this - can you provide a cite for a company, agency, individual, or whatever signing a contract to pay someone a billion dollars for an idea? "Billion dollar ideas" involve an awful lot of other people actually doing work, the use of an awful lot of general public infrastructure, and especially the use of laws and the court system to actually go from 'idea' to 'billion dollars'.
isn't microsoft a billion dollar idea? It's a bigger pie.
  #35  
Old 02-24-2020, 11:51 PM
steatopygia's Avatar
steatopygia is offline
Experimental FOC Test Pilot
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: North Idaho mostly
Posts: 2,166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
Never seen any evidence of this - can you provide a cite for a company, agency, individual, or whatever signing a contract to pay someone a billion dollars for an idea? "Billion dollar ideas" involve an awful lot of other people actually doing work, the use of an awful lot of general public infrastructure, and especially the use of laws and the court system to actually go from 'idea' to 'billion dollars'.
I don't have a cite for this, but let's use Microsoft as an example. Founded by two people essentially. Gates net worth is around $110 billion. His idea (Microsoft) earned him that. Along the way many more billions were paid to workers, general infrastructure, and the courts. He didn't get those billions by stealing from the workers or the people.

Yeah yeah, I know. I'm just using this as an example.
  #36  
Old 02-25-2020, 07:54 AM
JKellyMap's Avatar
JKellyMap is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 10,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by guizot View Post
It's true that he has created coalitions beyond his own organizations, (U.S. mayors for climate change, etc.), but what I mean is that within his own operations--the presidential campaign being an example--it seems that he thinks the only buy-in necessary to get things done is of the monetary type--he doesn't need ideas from anyone else. In that sense, he's kind of "transactional" in the way the Trump is. The difference, it seems to me, is that Bloomberg gives credit to others and recognizes the need for their contributions more than Trump.
That sounds right to me. Certainly, all other things being equal, I’d prefer a candidate with more experience in “community organizing” (e.g., Obama) rather than running a company.
  #37  
Old 02-25-2020, 12:30 PM
Pantastic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by steatopygia View Post
I don't have a cite for this, but let's use Microsoft as an example. Founded by two people essentially. Gates net worth is around $110 billion. His idea (Microsoft) earned him that. Along the way many more billions were paid to workers, general infrastructure, and the courts. He didn't get those billions by stealing from the workers or the people.
LOL you're joking right? "Microsoft" is not a billion dollar idea, it's a company name. No one was ever willing to pay a billion dollars for 'Microsoft' the name, or for something Gates did himself. His idea was to steal and buy code from people on the cheap, market it, then later leverage market dominance to make money. And yes, when Gates is taking billions for himself, he's stealing from his workers. He didn't work himself or come up with ideas, he had other people do the work but took the profit from their labor for himself. If Bill Gates developed his software alone, that could maybe qualify as a 'billion dollar idea'. But he simply didn't, even his first big offering (MS-DOS) was created by conning someone into selling him the rights to software, then later buying out the company that properly held the rights to forestall a lawsuit.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017