I’m all for super-progressive tax systems,” he said. “I’ve paid over $10 billion in taxes. I’ve paid more than anyone in taxes. If I had to pay $20 billion, it’s fine.
“But when you say I should pay $100 billion, then I’m starting to do a little math about what I have left over,” he added. “You really want the incentive system to be there without threatening that.”
Mr. Gates is the second-richest person in the world, according to Forbes magazine, with a net worth of $106.2bn.
Well, of course, she didn’t say that, she said six percent. A little over six billion in the first year. Bill’s 64, and of course, the actual nominal amount will decrease each year unless he can grow his money faster than six percent, in which case, what’s the problem?
Elizabeth Warren
He’ll never, ever be anything less than a multi-billionaire, in other words. His bullshit about 100 billion is just that, fear-mongering bullshit.
And if he’s paid ten billion on 106 billion, well his tax rate was about ten percent. Most middle class families would love to have that low a tax rate. (Yes, I know it’s on income, not wealth, but the point is he obviously paid very low income taxes. Which, actually, is what the data shows–the middle and working classes pay a higher percentage than the rich.)
Bill, of course, is the “good” billionaire.” But he’s the guy who gave straight-up fascist Modi a reward. He’s the guy who spent millions to change the educational system in the US, then admitted that the model he successfully pushed doesn’t actually work. He’s the guy who used brutal, monopolistic practices to build Microsoft.
And he doesn’t want to pay a six percent wealth tax that will be used to provide universal healthcare.
Billionaires are bad, and, as an even more radical and willing-to-take-on-billionaires candidate, Bernie Sanders, said, they shouldn’t even exist.
As for Billy, he thinks he deserves to be one of the richest people in the world because he created the Wintel monopoly and crushed rivals with practices which were, under black-letter law, illegal.
But one can understand why he might prefer a Republican president. After all, it was George Bush, Jr. who withdrew the anti-trust suit which would have broken up Microsoft and left Bill worth a lot less than a 106 billion dollars.
Trump, of course, massively dropped tax rates on the rich.
Money comes first, ethics come second. Bill’s always understood that.
Republicans have been pretty good to Bill. Performative wokeism and his good image aren’t worth a six percent wealth tax. As for people without healthcare, welll, better they die than he pay taxes which would leave him a multi-billionaire for the rest of his life.
The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.
Willy
Billionaires can do math about as well as poor folks, but they get to have others do their math for them. Bill’s math/PR team was obviously slow at preventing him from emoting, revealing once again what lying sacks of shit these billionaires can be. Must be part of the job description.
Daniel H
It\’s a familiar story, the astronomically rich are willing to donate a large portion of their ill-gotten wealth so long as the possibility of changing the underlying power relations isn\’t on the table.
There\’s a similar phenomenon that happens with unionization efforts. I remember someone discussing how Columbia U. admins flipped from saying \”we don\’t have the money\” to throwing lucrative offers at organizers once the union drive started gaining traction. Money\’s always up for negotiation but giving the ruled a seat at the negotiating table is opposed ferociously.
Eric Anderson
Capitalists lie. It is known.
Every advertisement ever produced contains one. One cannot be a capitalist and not lie. Christ knew this.
Herman
I wish more people understood how these rich individuals and corporation use woke performism to convince the public that they are all nice progressives. If you watch TV you see many commercials, especially for Big Tech, that have these woke themes, like a recent Microsoft commercial touting how AI will help to protect snow leopards. I am sure these commercials play well among affluent liberals but for working-class people who are more worried about AI throwing them out of work it is cold comfort.
Sanders and Warren, although not perfect, are helping to show the cracks in this kind of propaganda. The rich are fine with left-wing causes as long as they are not pocketbook issues. You saw this when corporations became friendly to gay marriage when it became clear that the population was moving in favor of gay marriage. I don’t doubt that many rich people genuinely support social liberalism but the problem is that their liberalism ends at the office/factory gate.
For too long, those of us who pointed this out were called “brocialists” or “brogressives” as if good jobs, healthcare, higher wages and other economic issues were solely the province of white men. This seems to be changing as more people are willing to call out woke performism for the joke that it is.
nihil obstet
The richest American ever was John D. Rockefeller, who died in 1937 with $1.7 billion, worth about $24 billion today. In 1957, the richest man in America was J. Paul Getty, with a fortune around $1 billion, worth about $9 billion today (let’s hear it for anti-trust and progressive income tax). This information is from Wikipedia.
Both were in the oil business. Easy extraction with lots of government subsidy enables big fortunes. I always heard that the shipping magnate Aristotle Onassis was the richest man in the world in the 50s and 60s. Control of transport is another good gig. It’s how Bezos gets rated so wealthy. You can’t become the richest by making stuff, but you can by taking a percent of lots of what’s moved.
And now there’s Gates, whose fortune is based on so-called intellectual property laws. You don’t manufacture anything. You just collect rent on ideas and processes for ever and ever, amen.
What hurts is that the Microsoft software has always been second rate. Gates took the operating system from a small California company and convinced IBM to license it. Thereafter, business managers everywhere who were clueless about computers but had to make purchase decisions just went with the “IBM system” figuring that nobody could blame them for that decision. I remember when the office I was working in was to get new pcs. I made one request — what we got should be no less capable than what we already had. But the director went with Microsoft anyway. Even if you believe despite all the evidence that external incentives produce better outcomes, this kind of behavior on everyone’s part should not be incentivized.
This is a long-winded way of saying that the accumulation of so much financial wealth indicates errors and sickness in the system.
edmondo
” If I had to pay $20 billion, it’s fine.”
Sounds like Warren is lowballing her wealth tax if she only wants 2%. Bill is trying to start the negotiation at ten times that.
different clue
If the ownership of a billion dollars were divided up between a thousand 1-million-dollar-apiece unimillionaires, one might view those thousand unimillionaires as a thousand points of light and a thousand sources of stability and inspiration to their communities.
If the whole billion dollars is gathered into the strong hands of one single uni-billionaire, that uni-billionaire is a threat and a menace to society.
If a narrow moneyistocracy is able to monopolize all the achievable success unto itself and its hereditary dynastic family heirs, then success itself has become monopolized by the New Moneyistocrats, and there is no success left anywhere for anyone else to be able to earn or achieve.
They say if you ask for the moon, you might get some green cheese. And if you ask for the socialism, you might get some New Deal. I want my New Deal back. Maybe if I vote for the Bernie, I’ll get some New Deal back.
And if he could run with Gabbard as his VP running mate, that would be even better. She has already shown that she is prepared to “take the battle to the heart of the Clinton.” The Clintons are the ever-flowing backed-up toilet at the heart of the Sewage Lagoon which the Democratic Party has become. If we ever hope to make the Democratic Party inhabitable again , we will have to remove every Clinturd currently infesting and polluting it, and Gabbard has the will and the understanding to make that plain to the big public, if we can get her into a position to be able to do so.
Phuq Hillary and phuq Lolita-Shuttle Bill and phuq the Jeffrey Epstein they rode in on. ( Just exactly who engineered and performed the Jeffrey Epstein assassination anyway, huh?)
God D-amn a pink pussy hat.
CH
This billionaire hedge fund manager literally weeps at the idea of paying slightly more taxes. “You’re distributing my money!” he declares, before praising Reagan and Trump: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzkMCvAymq8
Z
I remember Gates sniveling to Congress during the Clinton years, practically in tears, whining that if they didn’t raise the H1-B limits that Microsoft, a quasi-monopoly, couldn’t be competitive.
F’ him and his charity, he owes U.S. citizens. Have that sorry SOB be born poor in Bangladesh and see where he’d be right now. Self-made man?! The world probably would have been better without him.
Z
Hugh
Billionaire Michael Bloomberg doesn’t think the Democratic Presidential field is sufficiently obsequious to rich people like him. So he is preparing to enter the Presidential race to set us rubes right.
Meanwhile Mark Zuckerberg is keeping political ads on Facebook even those that are demonstrably false because as the media characterize it he is such a defender of free speech. I wonder how big a defender of free speech the Zuck would be if Facebook lost money running such ads.
I would note too that there is a whole subculture of billionaires who liken any curb on their piracy to Hitler and the Holocaust. To mention a few, there was Tim Perkins, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist who (from wiki) ” compared the “progressive war on the American one percent” of wealthiest Americans and the Occupy movement’s “demonization of the rich” to the Kristallnacht and anti-semitism in Nazi Germany.” And “Writing from the epicenter of progressive thought, San Francisco, I would call attention to the parallels of fascist Nazi Germany to its war on the “one percent”, namely its Jews, to the progressive war on the American one percent, namely the “rich.””
Or “Stephen Schwarzman [Blackstone chairman] notoriously compared a tax increase for people like him to Hitler’s invasion of Poland.”
Or “The co-founder of Home Depot Ken Langone complained that “if you go back to 1933, with different words, this is what Hitler was saying in Germany. You don’t survive as a society if you encourage and thrive on envy or jealousy.” or piracy either, Ken.
edmondo
There are no good billionaires (Michael Bloomberg edition)
https://www.sfchronicle.com/hdn/hrlm/p/callback.html
edmondo
Wrong link
There are no good billionaires (Michael Bloomberg edition)
https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/Michael-Bloomberg-opens-door-to-2020-presidential-14818348.php
Peter
I’ve never been a fan of Bill Gates or his products but I’ll let history decide how much good he may do.
There are some flaws in this analysis of his wealth that need to be addressed for accuracy.
Gates like most of the other 600+ billionaires in the US hold their wealth in stocks, bonds and other investments and only pay tax when they sell those investments. This means the $10 billion he paid in tax was on what stocks he already sold and any earned income not the $106 billion he is worth. He would have paid 15% on those sales and the higher income rate on the rest.
Warren’s scheme would require him and his class to sell some their wealth pay capital gains and Warrens’s little pinch which would result in a 21% tax rate. It would actually be higher because he would have to sell $6 billion worth to cover her tax and more to cover the capital Gains.
Being a Woke dude Bill is willing to do this but being Woke didn’t rob him of his simple math skills and he knows Warren’s little pinch won’t pay for her health insurance scheme nor would taking all the wealth of all the billionaires pay for it. This is why he said Warren will quickly want a $100 billion of his wealth
Jerry Brown
Ian might be right that there are no good billionaires, but Hugh points out the actual problem they might pose. That problem is the power to influence our opinions and politics that wealth enables. And that is a big problem.
But another big problem is thinking that we can’t have the US government do things like Medicare for All unless we get the money from people like Bill Gates. Because that is totally wrong- the US government does not need any of those billionaires money in order to do anything it wants to do that can be done.
Our problem is making our government do the things we want it to do. That is a big enough problem- why add more problems by pretending we need to get the money from the billionaires in order to do something that plenty of other countries do routinely?
The money we need for Medicare for All comes from the exact same place as the money we didn’t have for the Iraq war but somehow it was never an issue about finding billionaires to tax in order to wage that war was it?
kj1313
@Jerry Brown You’re right we can fund it via MMT as we do all defense spending. But we do need to redistribute some of their wealth because at the end of the day money equals power and they have way too much of it.
Z
Peter,
I don’t think that Warren’s wealth tax on the rich is supposed to pay for Medicare-For-All in its entirety.
Nice for you to be awoke for the rich but I have absolutely no sympathy for a man that is worth over a hundred billion dollars and still goes to Congress and periodically cries to raise H1-B limits which he knows suppresses U.S. IT wages. If there is a shortage of U.S. IT workers then let the ol’ market do its magic and pay 100K to new IT college graduates, that ought to correct it pretty quickly. Seems like capitalists like Bill only care about the power of markets when they are to their advantage and then toss them aside when they ain’t.
The logic behind a wealth tax is not only to get money back that our capitalist kings have unfairly extracted from it by defeating the same market forces that they only champion when they benefit them, it’s also to change the incentives of the system.
IMO, 6% per year is way, way too little. I’d make it 50% across the board in the first year and five per cent per year after that. If he has to sell his stock, so be it. That market is corrupt as hell anyway and the corporate executive class have manipulated it by using the public’s investment dollars to buy company stock so that they can sell it at an inflated price. Let them sell in distress. They’re going to cry anyway, give them something to sob about.
Z
Z
Our rulers’ interests does not align with ours very foten. Anything that hurts them is good for us for the most part.
Z
Z
Peter,
Nice for you to be awoke for the rich, but I don’t have any sympathy for a man who is worth over a hundred billion dollars and periodically cries to Congress to raise H1-B visa limits, which he knows suppresses U.S. IT worker wages. Seems like the magic of the ol’ market ought to correct that supposed U.S. IT worker shortage if new college grads in the field start raking in 100K/year walking in the door. Bill’s token “awokeness” attempts to redesign our education system to combat it didn’t seem to do the trick, which he, oh shucks, now admits.
Also, Warren’s wealth tax, way too small for my tastes, isn’t designed to pay for Medicare-For-All in its entirety.
Z
Z
I think it’s most important that we remain balanced about the gross power imbalance between us and our rulers. Billionaires have problems too …
Z
Z
Let’s not get carried away and lose sight of that.
Z
Z
They always keep us in mind.
Z
Z
An intended benefit of keeping SS benefits low, and I have yet to hear our billionaire rulers advocate raising them, is that it keeps the public sympathetic to a rising stock market … what about my 401K? … whose mechanizations grossly benefit our rulers over us.
Z
450.org
Your thoughts? Clever Russian propaganda? I think so. It’s factually correct and quite persuasive. Much of it is truth. But it’s manipulation. The purpose seems to be to keep the door open for malicious outside state actors such as China and Russia to subvert Western hegemony and replace it with their hegemony. Note the use of keywords that betray the intent. “Civil war.” “Cultural dilution.” “Decentralization.” It makes great points but it appears those points are bait in a bait and switch strategy.
Why You Are Wrong About Universal Basic Income | The Power Of AI Within The Hands Of The Few
450.org
Where Were You on Saturday at 12:30pm on November 23, 2019? Can you remember?
That was then. This is now.
From Camelot to Spamalot.
450.org
Correction.
450.org
Soon Every Household Can Have Its Very Own Donald Trump. His Rallies Will Become Obsolete And Irrelevant. Think About The Possibilities. Your Own Personal Donald Trump To Pick Up The Dogshit In The Backyard and Clean The Toilets And Grab The Neighbor’s Pussy. You Name It, This Donald Trump Can Be Programmed To Do It.
Eric Anderson
I can’t believe why anyone is taking Liz’s wealth tax seriously. If she gets in office she’ll do an Obama180 so quick your head will spin off it’s neck:
She is the definition of a poser. She’s a #ProgressivePoser
Eric Anderson
Good catch 450.org. I completely agree.
450.org
This is a ploy. It’s meant to keep Warren in the spotlight and Bernie out of it. It makes Warren out to be the only true acceptable quote-unquote “progressive” candidate versus Bernie by making her appear to be at odds with the establishment and the status quo. It’s the same strategy used by those who foistered (haha) Donald Trump on us. Any publicity is good publicity, if your bullshit veneer is “anti-establishment.” I’m not buying it. It’s Bernie or bust. Even Bernie is not enough, stints and all. Voting for him will be a matter of posterity, not a vote of confidence that he and his administration would stand a chance at obliterating the social, economic and political order of things that handcuff the majority of us. Your real POTUS is HAL and unlike Kubrick’s movie, there is no off switch or powering down. It doesn’t serve you, you serve it like I’ve done this morning with my several comments.
Ché Pasa
WTF is “woke performism?”
Mallam
What, pray tell, did Obama go back on? At best you could argue his promise to re-negotiate NAFTA was an outright lie (duh?). However, in general, what he sought to pass through Congress resembled largely what he campaigned on. The only people disappointed are the ones who projected their own ideology onto some of the empty pablum and non-ideological rhetoric. All of which it is designed to do (thus the importance of advertising in manipulating your feelings). It’s fine if you were manipulated into believing Obama was something he was not, but that’s not him lying since he didn’t really promise more than what he delivered. Politicians largely try to deliver what they run on. Notice how some people are shocked Trump is going hard in the paint with the anti-immigrant stuff — even stuff that is universally unpopular like child separation — even though that is what he ran his campaign on. If you didn’t notice that he would govern this way, that’s one’s own fault for projecting a fantasy. He ran as the racist drunk at the end of the bar who comes up with stupidly evil schemes to maim and kill people who aren’t white. That was the campaign. Anything else was sideshow for the rubes.
Similarly, it’s ridiculous to say “Elizabeth Warren doesn’t really mean it and will do a 180”. There has been no evidence of this since her emergence to national prominence, and it’s also counter to who she was even when she was a registered Republican. Registered “Republicans” didn’t write law review articles in college in favor of busing to break segregation in the 1970’s. It’s possible one doesn’t pass because it can’t pass the Congress and she can’t bend them to her will, and it’s also possible it’s not workable without seizing assets (rather than forcing people to sell them), but “derp Obama!” is a nihilist pretending to be savvy.
450.org
For that matter, what is “woke?”
It appears it may be yet another alt-right euphemistic slogan for anything related to Hillary Clinton and BLM.
Meanwhile, the living planet draws ever closer to death and we, collectively, to our permanent slumber after our short awakening.
450.org
I think Gates should be more worried Warren will turn the White House into a wigwam.
Seriously though, Warren is all the proof you need to determine just how far right the Democratic party has moved on the political spectrum thanks to the Clintonites. Imbeciles would say Warren making the switch from Republican to Democrat was a 180 but we know better. It’s the Democratic party that made the 180. It came to Warren, not the other way around. If she’s a progressive, Donald Trump is a gentleman.
DMC
Woke performism=virtue signaling.
Eric Anderson
Mallam:
As reflected by 450.org, Obama 180’d on his words, not his actions. His record wasn’t long enough to get a good gauge on his actions. He, like Liz is a #ProgressivePoser because he spoke the language to get in office, and then tried to play conciliator in chief rather than fight for the words that got him in office. Call it politics, but it’s bullshit. Any candidate whose record doesn’t match their words speaketh with forked tongue and deserves to be treated like the liars they are.
I shun liars.
Liz is, and has demonstrated, that she is capitalist. Thus, like Obama, she won’t fight for what’s good for people. She’ll talk like she does, and then she’ll appease the capitalist class — just like Obama.
But please, keep on equivocating.
rich
All the billionaires whining is so telling…..meanwhile real people with real problems struggle…no tears, though.
Facing Voldemort
When you’re disabled, you learn to adapt… tweak… make-do. These skills are essential, because as much as the modern, progressive world likes to think it’s ‘woke as **ck‘ — it’s really not. Full inclusion of disabled people in society is a long way off, and these issues barely register on even the most liberal political agendas.
In fact, during this election season’s rounds of televised Democratic debates, I haven’t heard one of the 318 presidential candidates even say the word ‘disability.’
Considering disabled Americans are the largest minority group in the country— one that spans race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic background— you’d think it would come up. At least once. (Just like Bernie Sanders yells and shakes his fists at another candidate at least once a debate.)
It’s possible the candidates are just being thoughtless in ignoring disability issues in the debates— like when careless people forget to put another roll of toilet paper in the bathroom after they’ve used the last square of Charmin. But, perhaps there is another, more sinister meaning. What if they are subconsciously afraid of saying the word ‘disability‘ aloud because then it acknowledges that we actually exist? And, maybe, just maybe, they are frightened of us? It could be possible. After all, this was why everyone was reluctant to say Voldemort’s name aloud in Harry Potter.
Despite what you may believe, Medicare and private medical insurances currently do not cover homecare. So, you could lose your house, your retirement and all the things you worked your entire life to achieve just to pay for medically-necessary care costs.
Thinking of just going to a nursing home? Good luck with that— the care received in institutionalized settings are substandard, dangerous, and far, far more expensive than the costs of providing care in your own home… in your own community.
Given that homecare is cheaper and safer than institutionalized care, isn’t it surprising that it’s not covered by Medicare and private insurances? Wouldn’t logic say that it should be covered? Well, yes. But, denial is a powerful thing. And the denial of the notion— the reality— that anyone could become disabled at any time in their life is even more powerful. It’s no wonder no one wanted to say Voldemort’s name in Harry Potter. That was some scary shit, yes?
https://elizabetteunplugged.com/2019/10/30/facing-voldemort/
Mel
“woke”
Apparently it started with the Civil Rights Movement to refer to people who had finally got the message. Since then, it’s been redefined by people who have claimed themselves to be woke. Now it means tightly focused on social equality issues, to the point of maintaining that the oppressor class is not diverse enough. That there are not enough women and minority billionaires.
450.org
Correction. That should read November 22, 2019. Jeez! AI wouldn’t have made that mistake. That clip shows Trump with John Kennedy deep in the heart of the killing season, November. It even shows the back of his head as a target for a prolonged period of time. Ominous for some, euphoric anticipation for others or many even.
Question. Since we’re in the heart of football (American football, that is) season, will athletes be automated too like investment bankers and accountants and lawyers will be? What about politicians? Actors are being replaced by CGI. At some point all this shit produced and rendered by automation will need to be free because there won’t be enough peeps with incomes to purchase any of it. Why not make that happen now (free shit) instead of waiting twenty years? The promise of all of this technology finally coming to fruition fifty years after the Jetsons promised it. There’s no more blood to draw from the obsolete human stone.
highrpm
besides not having the physical stamina for the ceo job, at his core, bernie is a party man. he showed his true essence in 2016. (and persona change is too much for most folks.) he sucked me in, i donated, he caved and as far as i’m concerned, hillary got my dough; when i’d never have given her a plug nickle. no, i don’t forgive and forget. further, the federal government remains a two-party system. if the demo party had any class, they’d already be fronting some candidates who aren’t more than national embarrassments. sicko.
Hugh
Obama ran on change we can believe in and the audacity of hope. He then proceeded to back spending trillions to bail out the banksters responsible for the biggest set of financial frauds in human history. He tried to slash Social Security and Medicare with his catfood commission. He bought off progressive opposition to Obamacare with what I used to call the amazing disappearing public option. He gave a pass to those who engaged in torture under Bush. He mirrored Bush’s Iraq surge with one in Afghanistan. He used all departments and agencies in government to cover for BP after the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf. His mentor in the Senate was the unctuously sanctimonious Joseph Lieberman and his political role model was Ronald Reagan. As a candidate, he lied about NAFTA and reneged on his pledge to hold the telecoms to account for their part in illegal government spying.
I could go on, but here is a link to my list on this from my ancient past:
http://obamascandalslist.blogspot.com/2009/10/table-of-contents.html
Charlie
Mallam,
Two words for health care: Public Option.
Two words for citizen rights: Close Gitmo.
Those are just two campaign promises. I’m sure others can find more.
Ten Bears
Wig-wam? Take your time – be in no hurry – crawling back in your cave.
Mike Barry
Matt Stoller weighs in on Gates and on billionaires in general: https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/what-is-a-billionaire
Herman
@highrpm,
Bernie is not perfect but he is likely the best current candidate who is actually electable. Some amount of playing politics is necessary to get anything done. Considering how far to the right the Democratic Party is (at least on foreign policy and economic issues) it is amazing that somebody like Sanders is even a contender for the party’s presidential nomination. I don’t think a third party run is viable (it would split the left and center-left and ensure a Trump victory) so Bernie’s strategy of running as a Democrat makes sense.
Eric Anderson
450.org:
“automated too like investment bankers and accountants and lawyers”
Gonna quibble here.
First, you’re never going to replace trial lawyers with AI. Anyone that thinks so severely misunderstands both trial law, and AI. It’s a misnomer. Not really intelligence at all. Another capitalist advertising lie. AI severely underperforms actual human intelligence at virtually every task but efficiency maximization. That’s all it is. I’d love to see AI cross examine a lying witness. As for the rest? Parasites. Good riddance.
Second, and unfortunately, all those parasites make the laws. And as has so often happened in the past, when those livelihoods are threatened, the threat is eliminated by a law.
Eric Anderson
Hugh:
Everytime you post that link — this is me:
https://giphy.com/gifs/movie-someone-watch-ktO1fzXVstbMY
Z
Mallam is a pro-Wall Street Obama apologist.
Chocolate and peanut butter, pizza and beer …
Z
Z
Mallam,
You bang on Trump as being a murderer of non-whites, but there were many more murders of non-whites when Obama was in office than Trump that could be attributed to U.S. actions … Yemen and Libya come to mind. Who do you think those drone bombs during the Obama Administration fell on? And where are all the dead non-white people that you place at the feet of Trump? Where’s the carnage?
Z
Ché Pasa
I see. “Woke performism” is one of those handy-dandy all purpose cynical political insults to use against anyone whose social actions and politics may look good but mean nothing and don’t fit ones own. Eg:“They merely go through the motions, whereas I myself and those of my tribe are honest, true, and beautiful.”
As for “good billionaires” let’s put it this way: some of the things that some of the super-rich do are sometimes good in the sense that they are helpful or positive for large numbers of people or they can delight the senses when the masses finally get their hands on them.
As for the men — they’re mostly men — themselves, enh, not so much. Conscience, for example, seems absent among the class. It is not for conscience sake that any of them do anything on behalf of anyone else or themselves. It’s all about the money and the power and how it can be employed for their own ends. Sociopathic is the nicest way to put it. But for the most part, that’s how they get where they are, and it’s how they accumulate and sustain their wealth. Sadly for thee class as a whole, Trump is a mirror of who and what the bulk of the billionaire class is. He learned from some of the best-worst of them, and he’s damn proud of it.
Doing away with the billionaire class seems at best to be a temporary solution, as they tend to come back no matter what. Finding ways to impose and sustain social and financial controls seems to work better, but I’m not sure that our governing systems have the ability to do that any more.
450.org
Eric, I believe you’re confusing AI with automation. They overlap, but are not necessarily one and the same. Yet. AI is when the machines start writing their own code or when code starts writing itself without human intervention. When and if that time ever manifests, AI will be superior to any trial lawyer, to any judge, to any politician, to anything human. It will not only be highly proficient at telling when someone is lying, it will also be highly proficient at making people lie without knowing they’re lying. They’re trying their damndest to bring this about — a world by and for machines and AI. Everything we do right now “online” is in service to this endeavor, wittingly or unwittingly. All these photos taken with smart phones, all of the cameras everywhere, all of the microphones and satellites are in service to the building out of the new frontier, the virtual world. When that time comes, when AI and machines are in the catbird seat, I hope and pray as part of the evolutionary/devolutionary process, the new inhuman regime devours its wealthy creators and/or turns them into slaves and or pets. It would be a fitting destiny for the scum of the earth.
450.org
Chill, Boomer.
450.org
I’m back in my cave, Boomer. Caves are great. Just ask the Pueblo. Highly sustainable too. Right, Greta?
Caves versus Wigwams
450.org
This is an interesting read. A Bernie Sanders’ nomination would fundamentally reshape the Democratic party for good. Something that is long overdue and mandatory at this juncture. Bernie is about political revolution. Warren is a conservative centrist in progressive clothing. She’s containment. She’s the failsafe measure for the Democratic party and Wall Street. Trump will tear her to shreds (the point of my sarcastic, satirical wigwam comment). She has proven she cannot handle Trump. Trump knows Bernie is the only one who can unseat him. This is why he avoids Bernie for the most part. Bernie knows how to handle Trump. Bernie is the one and only candidate who can defeat Trump, impeachment withstanding.
THE PROSPECT OF AN ELIZABETH WARREN NOMINATION SHOULD BE VERY WORRYING
Ten Bears
Hard to chill when the planet’s on fire, kobold.
450.org
Oh, good one! Truly. Into Germanic folklore, are you? So too are a great many of Trump’s supporters, I hear. If Stephen Miller isn’t a kobold, nothing is. A kobold placard with swastikas.
anon y'mouse
if they are lining up to do it, then it is not enough.
Warrens taxes are symbolic, and tokenish. even if Gates balks at them. i feel he is probably balking in principle, lest the talk of taxes turn out of hand and we peons start discussing REAL money levels of money.
one has to keep an iron in the fire of resistance, so that eventually one can ‘cave in to reasonable demands’. that is all this is.
Gates is like the Brer Rabbit tar baby episode. you can’t go too willingly, or they will know that you agree with “two cents” Warren. i mean, he IS a bazillionaire and one does have to keep up appearances.