• ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Billionaires want to sit on their dragon hoard of wealth

      Having wealth and hoarding wealth aren’t the same thing. Hoarding implies isolation and withheld access. Someone keeping money under their mattress is hoarding that money. Someone who is investing in businesses in active operation within the economy is doing the exact opposite of hoarding.

      Stop misusing this term.

        • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There’s only a few ways to become a billionaire. Get money, get more money, and get even more money.

          Typically by creating something extremely popular, which in turn becomes valued at much more than it cost you to create it.

          Minecraft, for example, made its creator $2 billion when he sold it to Microsoft.

          Also be born into a family with lots of money.

          Not really; statistically, 70% of generational wealth is gone by the second generation, 90% by the third. Inheritors, generally speaking, spend what they inherit, they don’t hold onto it for the next generation to inherit it again. Again, opposite of hoarding.

          Just because some of that money is in assets, bonds, stocks, and such doesn’t mean that they don’t hoard the wealth.

          Yes, it does. The only way to hoard money is to not spend it. No billionaire has a Scrooge McDuck vault full of cash. Billionaires don’t hoard–ironically, hoarding money will only ever decrease your net worth, unless your currency is in deflation, in which case you’ve got bigger problems.

          Investing in businesses only makes the stock holders richer it doesn’t trickle down.

          You’re acting like businesses exist in some separate reality from the rest of the population. The businesses profit by offering goods and services that the market wants. That is what makes the share price go up, and in turn makes stock holders wealthier. Buying shares all by itself doesn’t do shit.

          ‘Stockholders get wealthier when the business is having a positive impact on the economy by giving the market something it wants’ isn’t exactly the argument you think it is.

          they just want to see their net worth go up.

          And spending (already-taxed) money to buy stuff that then proceeds to become more valuable, is not an act that deprives anyone else’s wallet of a single penny.

    • rah@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You are quite wrong.

      I disagree.

      Most want enough money to be content in life. Billionaires want to sit on their dragon hoard of wealth, while shafting those on the bottom line.

      All, including billionaires, want to ensure the survival of their genes. Wealth is sexually attractive. At no point does more wealth stop being attractive. So everyone wants as much money as they can get. That doesn’t mean they’re necessarily prepared to do what’s required to get it (murder, exploitation, etc.) but they want the money.

      And no difference between the homeless and billionaires. Yeah fucking right.

      I didn’t say no difference, I said no difference in kind.

      Nobody wants to be fucked over, obviously. But that is what is happening.

      Indeed.

      In every single case you can still be a traitor to something that groups you.

      I disagree.

      If you are not in the extremely wealthy class, then defending them is betraying what you are.

      That’s ridiculous. If a person defends the extremely wealthy honestly then that isn’t betraying what they are, that is what they are.