This is a joke, right?

Shouldn’t be allowed. Companies shouldn’t be allowed to buy each other. We already know what happens with consolidation.

Right. Traffic enforcement that’s “random” is fundamentally unjust. But conservatives like it because they can bully the out-groups, and some assholes like it because it brings money in via fines.

First of all, “there’s no money for this” coming from the federal government is a lie, on any topic. They just don’t want to, and take advantage of people not knowing how money works. There’s always money for bombs, but for schools and social services not so much.

Second of all, as others have said, capping social security payments per year is stupid. It should be progressive. The first $x don’t get taxed at all, then higher rates as your income goes high.

Third, it shouldn’t be tied to your personal contributions. We live in a society, despite what anti social conservative monsters say.

Many companies use workday for the job application process, which wants an account. Workday is a steaming pile of garbage.

In-groups to protect, out-groups to bind. Hierarchy. That’s conservatism.

They don’t see the contradiction because to them there is none. Men get medicine because they’re in-group. Women don’t because they’re out-group. The rule is applied consistently. No hypocrisy.

You cannot engage them by attacking their hypocrisy. They don’t care. It’s like if someone said you’re a bad person because the colors of your clothing aren’t alphabetical top to bottom. That’s just like… Nonsense. Not a factor.

You need to either get them to see more people as in-group (see: people who became less virulently homophobic or racist when they actually make a friend of that category), or you need to utterly humiliate their in-group. It’s all emotions. They’re stupid.

I am concerned about how we don’t have 20 million deaths mostly because trump and his goons are stupid, not because they don’t want to do mass murder.

You seem to have imagined a link between

This has to end, nobody is worth that much. Even if they were, they shouldn’t have that much, because nobody needs that much.

And

Billionaires are a symptom of a society that is sick.

as if they were trying to say that the people in the articles are billionaires. That’s illusionary. There’s a full stop.

This

will never be reasonable that some people make hundreds of times what other make on a full time job.

Was the point. That some are only millionaires is irrelevant. Billionaire is a subtype of “too rich” used as an example.

No fundamental facts are in error.

Billionaires are a subcategory of people with too much money.

But also what’s your point here? Just pedentry? Defending CEO wealth at this 614:1 ratio? Defending billionaires right to exist?

The initial goal post was “This has to end, nobody is worth that much.”, referring to CEOs making 614 times more than workers. Their wealth being in billions or millions was not mentioned. The goal post was not moved.

The sequence as I understand it is

• no one needs that much money
• billionaires have more than that much money. They don’t need it.
• you: none of the ceos are billionaires
• me: fine, but they still don’t need that much money.

If anything, you pointing out that the CEOs aren’t billionaires is a distraction from the point.

Anyone who looks at their phone while driving should lose their phone, vehicle, and license.

You can live a comfortable life with $5 million in the bank. No one needs $17m a year.

I accept that she wasn’t referencing the historical meaning on purpose. She likely wasn’t a classic Nazi trying to dog whistle. However, not recognizing the phrase is concerning. Especially given the current rise of Nazi-compatible ideology in power.

That really red area under the mouse cursor is… Borough Park? Super conservative Jewish area? Or maybe bensonhurst? I live here but am apparently bad at maps.

I think some of them say stupid stuff as a weird power move - “yeah I said bullshit what are you going to do about it? Nothing. Because you’re weak”

This is a factor in why fascists only really respond to power. It’s all they understand, and even that understanding is limited.

I don’t know how it all works, but I did see on Vanguard there’s an option to change how vanguard votes on your behalf. There’s the default of “maximum profit”, but there’s also “long term stability” and “ethical” (not the exact names). I don’t think every company has options like that, but they probably should, if we’re going to keep this kind of thing around at all.

If you use vanguard, go see what your options are.

Edit: think I found it https://corporate.vanguard.com/content/corporatesite/us/en/corp/about-our-funds/proxy-voting-across-funds/investor-choice.html#policy-options

Egan-Jones Wealth-Focused Policy […] This policy by rule rejects proposals based on environmental, social, or political considerations unless they directly contribute to revenue generation at the company receiving the proposal.

None of them look super good though

At my old job, there was some back and forth about some feature detail. The product lady messaged me and said “do you have a few minutes to talk about the final solution?”

I was like, “uhh you mean the sorting filter on the projects page? Yes, so long as we don’t call it the final solution”

I don’t know if she knows that phrase already has a history

This lead me asking a bunch of coworkers if they knew. About half were familiar.

not because it wasn’t true, but because people would get offended.

I have a hypothesis that as society we’re too polite. We don’t tell people they’re being assholes because that’s uncomfortable, so they continue being assholes without appropriate social pressure.

At the lowest level, it is possible to pull people in your peer-group out of shitty world views. It’s slow and difficult. But like I got an old coworker to be way less homophobic through our chats at work.

At the larger level, nah, fuck em.