• Makeitstop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 months ago

    I wanna say they specifically called out property destruction as being against the rules. And overpaying as well iirc, so you can’t offer someone millions for a sandwich that you then eat.

    Plus, if we’re being pedantic, burning the money isn’t spending it, which is what he is supposed to do.

    The movie also has the advantage of having a contract that presumably covers any other loopholes the audience thinks of, but which they don’t explicitly address in the script. Once you take it out of a movie and start treating it like a challenge to be solved, you can no longer hide behind some unseen fine print.

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      they specifically called out property destruction as being against the rules

      Not in this meme, which is what I’m referring to.

      And overpaying as well

      So that rules out spending them in the US and several other countries…

      In under-regulated capitalism, prices aren’t set at what’s fair, they’re at the maximum that they can get away with without losing too many sales/clients.

      That’s by definition overpaying from the perspective of the buyer/client.

      Plus, if we’re being pedantic

      We are indeed. Carry on, good sir/madam/cuttlefish

      burning the money isn’t spending it, which is what he is supposed to do.

      Damn, you got me there. Good point 😁

      The movie

      Again, I was referring to the meme only, not the movie that inspired the premise

      also has the advantage of having a contract that presumably covers any other loopholes the audience thinks of

      That’s a mountain sized presumption…

      Once you take it out of a movie and start treating it like a challenge to be solved, you can no longer hide behind some unseen fine print.

      Good. Genies have had it too good for too long 😛