moon ,

Video games have money caps so why can't they

KingThrillgore , avatar

I'm so happy for them while I have to spend how much on food again

Mastengwe ,

If she keeps inspiring hundreds of thousands of people to vote- I don’t care how much money she makes. At least she’s not screwing people over to make it like so many other billionaires.

And for the record, if she wasn’t making that much money, it’s not like someone else would. That’s not how it works. And if she made less money, it would have no effect on anyone here.

Also for the record- I hate her music. I just don’t blindly hate people just because they’re wealthy.

Binthinkin ,

Well yea your tax system is broken, congratulations 🎊

systemglitch ,

That "eat the rich" thing is taking permenent residence in my thoughts. Thought virus's, eh.

RamblingPanda ,

Congrats for the amazing year, you leeches. Let's get the BBQ ready to smoke you.

booty , avatar

The fact that there is such a thing as a billionaire while there are homeless people is a horrific crime

Blackmist ,

An amazing year for rich people.

Nice to see them get something, just 225 years in a row.

doingthestuff ,

Way longer than that. Really they had lost ground and wanted their slaves back but they're trying to turn us all into slaves.

Blackmist ,

There was a reason I picked that number. I see we have a 🤑 emoji but not one for guillotines.

🇫🇷 will have to do.

undergroundoverground ,

For sure. WW2 really shows the system for what it is now.

An utterly insane number of men were fighting or part of the logistics in WW2. It really was a crazy percentage of them. China was in full civil war and India sent huge numbers to fight also.

The rest, including vast numbers of women, were producing the tank, ships, ammunition etc. Needed for the war. Its estimated that around 4 tonnes of ammunition was expensed for every soldier killed. It really can't be understated just how much production, from so many people, went into maintaining that global war.

Yet, despite this, there was more than enough food for everyone. The only outliers were due to incompetence and callousness by the UK in India and Germany trying to starve the UK. However, of course, these were preventable one way or another.

The only thing we lost was the ultra wealthy.

The period just after WW2 saw a historic level of equality that we will likely never see again. This, to me, clearly shows that we don't all work as much as we do for the benefit of our community or anything like that. Its solely for the enrichment of the ultra wealthy, who then use their wealth to extract yet more wealth at ever greater rates.

The answer has and always will be the strategic refusal of work, outside of what is needed to maintain society. Its why we live in an employment based, market fundamentalist society. Its so the idea of doing anything like that seems like dangerous fundamentalism. But we have to ask ourselves, in what kind of a world is not spending 80% of your adult awake time working, mostly for other peoples benefit, producing the very power used to force this on us, thats killing our planets ability to sustain life, that works us all into an early grave, viewed as extremism?

It can't be a very good or rational one and certainly not one worth defending.

TheMagicalTimonini ,

You know what would be great? A good year for everyone who is not filthy rich.

NigelFrobisher ,

Memo: when people say “it’s not a zero sum game” they’re not talking about finite resource situations, which actually are that.

3volver ,

That money will just become an arbitrary number. They'll look back on this in about 20 years thinking what a funny thing, people thought a number on a computer screen meant something. If you can't turn your money into something with fundamental value then what is it anyway?

philthi ,

20 years is extremely optimistic.

Sprokes ,

They can, that number gives them power. They can use it to buy things...

BaldProphet , avatar

She could donate a life-changing amount of money to every Fediverse user and still have more left over than she knows to do with.

ScreamingFirehawk ,

So could the other 140 people who became billionaires this year, and that's not even mentioning all the existing billionaires. I really don't understand what this focus on Taylor Swift is about.

BaldProphet , avatar

They could fund everyone in the Fediverse and Reddit combined!

/s because it ain't happening :(

octopus_ink ,

I really don’t understand what this focus on Taylor Swift is about.

I'm pretty sure I know what it's about.

Female, powerful, encourages folks to vote.

All this ramped up after the "Taylor Swift tells her fans to vote" brouhaha a couple months back.

I can't swing a stick without hearing another story about how generous she is with her $$ and her fans, so while she may not be perfect, and maybe could be doing more, she seems like a decent person, and I'm gonna bet she's doing a lot more for everyday folks she helps than most of the other folks on that list.

loobkoob , avatar

I’m pretty sure I know what it’s about.

Female, powerful, encourages folks to vote.

It's The Guardian so I don't think it's rooted in misogyny or her trying to change the power structure. It's likely just because she's one of the most famous people on the planet, and probably the most recognisable person on this list.

octopus_ink ,

I was more referring to all the attention on her - the jet memes, the controversy about her relationship with Kelce, etc etc. That the guardian may be riding that wave without intending to push the same agenda is certainly possible.

Event_Horizon ,

Yes, but have you considered the major phycological impact for poor Tay Tay if she only had enough money and resources for several thousand years instead of hundreds of thousands?

Tay Tay would probably be so devastated she'd write a breakup song about her bank account.

prole , avatar

I am far from a Taylor Swift fan, but this comment seems pretty clueless. How do you know she doesn't have plans to give away most of it? She seems like the type of person that would. She's also like 34 years old, so maybe give it a few years?

There are no billionaires who became such ethically... But I'm struggling to think of any that did it in a more ethical way than Swift. Especially after literally re-recording her entire catalogue to get around scummy capitalists that tried to unduly profit from her talent.

can ,

There are no billionaires who became such ethically... But I'm struggling to think of any that did it in a more ethical way than Swift.

That's such a low bar it's hardly worth mentioning. Yes, she could mature into a woman who contributes more to philanthropy but as it stands the fact that she can even get so rich without doing anything about it proves she doesn't give a shit.

fsxylo ,

But now she can take her private jet grocery shopping!

summerof69 ,

But why would she? She earned that, while you're dreaming about life-changing sums falling from the sky.

nac82 ,

Billionaires don't earn their wealth.

BaldProphet , avatar

It's mostly tongue-in-cheek. I'm not actually suggesting that Taylor Swift should give away all her money to randos on the Internet.

yoz ,

Let's gooooooooo

Jimmycakes ,

Cool cool cool

Everyone else will just burn up

stinerman , avatar

Every year is an amazing year for rich people.

Mango ,

Yeah what's better for them now?

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • SciFi
  • Fediverse
  • fountainpens
  • dev_playground
  • Mdev
  • test
  • announcements
  • vexblue
  • anki
  • VideoEditingRequests
  • kbinrun
  • pamasich
  • All magazines