Do you support sustainability, social responsibility, tech ethics, or trust and safety? Congratulations, you’re an enemy of progress. That’s according to the venture capitalist Marc Andreessen.

    • uphillbothways@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      A fever is a symptom and similarly it is one that must be treated directly to save the life of the patient.

      • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        This is the much stronger analogy. Billionaires are a problem in and of themselves, but only getting rid of billionaires will just lay the groundwork for new billionaires

        • eric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          It really depends on how you “get rid” of billionaires.

          If you do it in a way that ties a wealth limit to minimum wages, then we won’t have billionaires until they raise the income of the lower class to a point where the economic climate permits billionaires. Tying it to a fixed 1,000,000,000 monies would be a horribly flawed design because it would not be inflation proof and would vary across currencies. After all, a billionaire in dollar$ isn’t the same as a billionaire in ¥en.

          • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Within a socdem or capitalist society, neither of those solutions would be effective at eliminating billionaires or the inequality that comes with their existence. The only solution that could guarantee an elimination of billionaires is to seize their property and wealth (they can only have 1 house) and establish a socialist society.

    • akwd169@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      They can be both. Let’s step away from the disease terminology and put it plainly.

      When there is this much suffering and inequality, billionaires shouldn’t be allowed to happen.

      No one deserves that much power nor that much wealth when around 75% of all human beings are facing such a disproportionate amount of struggle that its difficult to even describe the comparison.

      Billionaires live in a utopic paradise while the majority of humans are trapped in an existence that ranges from intolerable to abhorrent, abject poverty to barely surviving, all the while spending the majority of their time working, which contributes to the billionaires wealth…

    • DessertStorms@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      I agree because obviously capitalism pre-exists billionaires by default, but there is also no denying that them being means they have so much more power over every aspect of life than the rest of us, that they now completely control our lives and are absolutely making sure that fighting back becomes harder and harder. To abolish capitalism, we must get rid of the billionaires, they are our biggest hurdle (and are only people, after all).