• Honytawk@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    220
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Wasn’t there some guy who set themselves a challenge where they were going to make a living without using any of their money?

    I believe he had to stop after 3 months because of health concerns.

    They see being poor as entertainment.

    • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      137
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      It didn’t end that quick, but he stopped after 9 months due to health concerns. The goal was to earn $1 million in a year, he had earned $62k.

        • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          109
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Don’t forget he accepted charity in the form of free housing and donations that were likely only available to him through existing connections.

          Also this:

          Despite failing to make the million dollars he had aimed for, Black says it was still a successful experiment after demonstrating how it was possible to rebuild his life through the power of determination.

          So this dipshit learned nothing. He failed, and would probably have died in the gutter, but instead he pulled the ripcord and bailed on poverty in a way that isn’t available to 99% of humans on earth.

          • whereisk@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            68
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            He had knowledge and connections to the upper echelons and he couldn’t make it, and when health concerns arose he went back to his money because it sucks to be working poor and in need of medical assistance.

            • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              51
              ·
              6 months ago

              He also didn’t have the stress that would come from actual failure with no money.

              Bankruptcy, homelessness and real poverty fuck up your ability to succeed in a vastly underrated way.

              • whereisk@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                28
                ·
                6 months ago

                Exactly. The calculus for taking risks is vastly different when there’s a safety net. You can treat it as a game and go all in.

                On the other hand if there’s even a small chance of losing housing or getting in legal trouble or your family being destitute you take no risks - if you are a person with a sense of responsibility that is.

                • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Yup, or you take maybe a couple risks in a lifetime, but if they don’t pan out you suffer from them for years as you go back to stability and try to regain what little of a toehold on a good life you might have had.

                  The very real lesson for the poor is “don’t try,” especially if you have dependents. You’ll be knocked back harder than you can imagine.

                  These mfs don’t know what it’s like to see loved ones start losing teeth because you made a failed push and now you’re paying it back with interest.

              • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                ·
                6 months ago

                His father got cancer during the experiment. He considered ending it then, but he continued with the experiment.

                Imagine having that sort of choice. He didn’t have to skip work to take his dad to appointments. He didn’t have to eat ramen to afford chemo. It was only when his own health was at risk that he pulled the plug.

                Imagine a world where everybody had that sort of safety net. Just like, “Nope, shit’s too hard.”

              • PunnyName@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                For most people, it’s easier to become homeless than it is for the homeless to extricate themselves from it.

                • John_McMurray@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  This is all political horseshit. It’s not that hard to get out of homelessness, I was homeless a lot in my late teens and early twenties. Of course freezing to death in a Canadian winter is a strong motivator. Fucking taking a shower and doing work that you’d rather not is all it takes if you’re not mentally fucked or strung out

              • TheHarpyEagle@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                Even the stress of worrying about money. Yeah you can take out a loan for your risky business venture when you know you won’t have to worry about paying it back. Yeah, you can couch surf for a while when you aren’t staring down the next few decades of your life.

            • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              16
              ·
              6 months ago

              Right, those 62k he did earn would have been gone and him probably homeless as soon as his health issues got worse. It’s a reality for a lot of Americans. Also those 62k he earned were thanks to all the education and experience he was able to get thanks to his privilege. Most people aren’t fortunate enough to have his level of education and experience to help them even get to 62k. I make 25 percent less than that and still feel fortunate of where I got to since I came from absolutely nothing.

        • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          39
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yea, he flipped free furniture off of Facebook. Only a rich asshole would come up with an idea like that

          • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            39
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            “If I can be a parasite, you can too*”

            * just ignore that I didn’t again become a millionaire like I said I would. And just ignore all the experience and schooling I started with that others don’t.

      • Mog_fanatic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        92
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        This video was such absolute bull crap lol. He randomly found some dude on like his SECOND night homeless that let him stay in a spare room for free.

        Then he flipped free stuff on Craigslist and Facebook for cash which is… fine I guess. A little sleazy but whatever. Magically found transportation and the ability to store and haul this stuff all over town but never explained any of that.

        Then he majestically found someone to cosign and provide initial payments to rent like a four bedroom house that he sublet to 3 other tenants… So he found some random guy to COSIGN for him which is crazy knowing how much liability that puts on you while ALSO finding a landlord that is allowing a guy with no job, no income, no credit, no prior residences, and no money to not only rent from him with a random co signer but also allowing him to sublet to three other random ass people the landlord will never even meet. This is possible… But EXTREMELY unlikely. Also, the fact that this dude tries to do a homeless challenge by immediately becoming a landlord is pretty funny ngl. Also it’s worth noting that his final number ($64k or whatever) was revenue not profit. He said himself he was making about 50% profit so he made closer to around $30k on the year.

        And on top of all that, the fact that he cites health issues as this unforeseen unfortunate issue that got in the way of his inevitable success is kinda rich. That’s… kinda the deal with poverty. You fall on hard times. Health often falls apart. Unexpected expenses destroy you. It can and often does completely tear your world apart. Thems the breaks man lol. Dude just experienced life a little and quit.

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          36
          ·
          6 months ago

          It sounds like he wasn’t using his money directly but might have used his ability to access his money to build “credit” with others.

          • bitwaba@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            34
            ·
            6 months ago

            Used his existing social credit too. All his random business successes during those 9 months were from “I know a guy that might want in on this” kind of crap.

            • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              I mean, it’s possible but unless he specifically said that he wouldn’t use his identity during the experiment, just proving who he was would be enough to trivialize the risk of even a significant loan for most people. A lender would know that whatever happens, either they’ll get paid back by him from within the experiment or he’ll pay them back as the billionaire after the experiment, maybe even rounding up to the next significant digit or something crazy like that (but still trivial for him).

              Also, “I was doing an experiment” isn’t a defense against fraud. Though him being a billionaire probably means that the only penalty would be paying back the victim with maybe a little extra plus legal fees or hush money.

        • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Nitpicking, but that’s also not like a sustainable way to conduct oneself in a society. Like his only “service” was inserting himself as an unnecessary middleman.

          If everyone did that you’d have nothing but grifters making money moves on eachother, and nothing would ever get actually made. Basically, it’s not the kind of work which produces new value through labour.

          Which maybe if the point idk, I’m not a total parasite

      • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I could be wrong but isn’t that more than most people make in 12 months?

        So it might not be possible to make millions, but for someone who has the loose ethics of millionaires it’s still possible to make significant money starting from scratch. The issue being the unethical/exploitative behavior needed to get there.

        • Zorque@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          25
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          He didn’t really start from scratch, though. He used connections and training he had from before he embarked on this “experiment”.

              • Blum0108@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                6 months ago

                Not really something to be held up as an example of success. Not everyone can do that, or it wouldn’t work. Plus there are people who could use that free stuff that he’s essentially stealing from. Just goes to show that this guy has no ethics.

                • HessiaNerd@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Honestly, I would argue at least a portion of those items would get thrown away if he hadn’t gotten them. When someone wants something gone, and when a different person wants to acquire that particular thing don’t always align. It’s tweaker arbitrage, but it’s not that big a deal IMHO.

                  The real moral failing from my perspective is not recognizing how much help he got, and how ‘lucky’ he was.

          • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            6 months ago

            Anybody can get training at a community college or do networking. This isn’t exclusive to millionaires.

            • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              6 months ago

              You’d be surprised at the things you can get for free simply for not being an onerous person.

              • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                6 months ago

                Sure, the a pick-up magically landing in his lap for free, at the exact moment he needed one, because he wasn’t difficult to deal with is way more believable than “he lied and it wasn’t even a good lie.”

                • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  8
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Well, with that attitude I’m not surprised this hasn’t happened to you because you’d probably end up blaming the person who gave it to you if anything goes wrong with it.

    • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      *chose to stop

      *because of high health care prices

      And as far as I know they have not used any of their privilege to do anything to change that situation for others who don’t have that choice.

      • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s because the problem was being poor.

        So…stop being poor.

        It’s easy. He just proved it!

        (Massive /s but sadly, for the privileged guy, not sarcasm)

      • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        Omg you’re so right!

        If the experiment was a success, shouldn’t he help others with that path?

        Or maybe that path was overinflated as much as possible…

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      6 months ago

      imagine the privilege to just quit being homeless for health concerns while a lot of people go homeless because of health complications. so he ended where homeless people frequently start. fuck that guy.

      • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        6 months ago

        He wasn’t homeless. He had free shelter by staying with a friend. Nothing luxurious, but he wasn’t living on and from the streets. He also only made the money because he called in a “favor” from a business partner that let him sell some niche shit for more money lol

        All in all it was a total failure, he realized how much of a failure it was and then backed out feigning “health concerns” to save face.

    • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      He made $62k and called that a success. Why not then use said $62k to fix his health issues? Wouldn’t that be much more realistic in terms of unplanned medical costs setting back a lot of Americans?

  • Wrench@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    ·
    6 months ago

    They would still have all the advantages of the business connections they made as a billionaire, and would still have a massive advantage over everyone else.

    Run the experiment.

    • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      But many of their connections would be poor as well. Do you think people actually care what Elon or Bezos think? They’re not geniuses, they just have money. Compare them to Steve Jobs or Warren Buffett, who actually knew what they were doing.

      No one seriously asks Bezos or Elon for advice because they were just lucky. Their companies succeed despite them, not because of them. Like the guy who started Uber (forgot his name). Nobody listens to them.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        39
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Compare them to Steve Jobs or Warren Buffett, who actually knew what they were doing.

        Steve Jobs, the man who thought he could beat pancreatic cancer with a juice cleanse?

        • NaoPb@eviltoast.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          The guy who wanted to build fanless computers. Forcing designers to turn down the fans on laptops, having them cook but silent.

          Yeah, that guy was a true genius. /s

          He was great with words though.

          • vga@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            The Apple Silicon machines are fucking awesome though, and most of them are fanless. Even the ones that do have them, you have to do some pretty special shit to make them turn on.

            I hope the Linux world gets proper ARM machines some day too, but for the time being, the Apple machines are like a full generation ahead.

        • Starkstruck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Well, being super smart in one field doesn’t necessarily mean you have common sense. You could be the greatest physicist in the world but still think lizard people control everything.

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        Steve Jobs was a grade A cunt with the rest of them. Don’t give him a pass for his high charisma score. Dude walked into Atari with no fucken shoes on back in the 70s trying to get a job. I used to work with a 72 year old dude who was a head repairman there working on the consoles. Its all confidence, smoke, and mirrors. Skills are secondary to spewing bullshit and making people feel excited.

        • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          If he wasn’t integral to Apple’s success, then why did they fail after he left, and then succeed after he returned? What innovative products has Tim Apple created? Air Pods? The Apple Watch?

          • Sanctus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Why do we have party faces in tabletops? Why focus our skillsets on salesmenship while others become engineers? He was a great ringleader, he could probably sell people a wet banana peel like it was life changing. Maybe the products themselves aren’t as stellar as Jobs made them out to be. Maybe a phone is just a phone and when Merlin isn’t there blowing smoke up your ass you can finally see that.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      6 months ago

      Or would their connections who weren’t billionaires just exploit them so they could take the top spot?

    • Vlyn@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Take the money away and the connections are worthless. They have business connection because of money.

        • hglman@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          Rich people are not good at being friends, especially the one who are in charge of large businesses. They are good at exploiting others.

      • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Do some of them have big brains/work ethic?

        Not all the random massive family inheritance people obviously. Just imagine some folks worked really damn hard to earn an unethically yet unfortunately legally large amount of money.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          Do some of them have big brains/work ethic?

          Gates seems smart enough. If he lost all his money I am sure he is capable to saying being the store manager at. Walmart.

    • gimsy@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      Well, if you remove from ALL billionaires, they won’t be much different from me or my neighbor

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      They would still have all the advantages of the business connections they made as a billionaire

      Business connections to other people who also had their money stripped away.

      I mean, we’ll never run the experiment because the folks in charge of the Laboratory of Democracy all sit on the boards of Microsoft, Boeing, and Berkshire Hathaway. But Bill Gates doesn’t benefit by hobnobbing with Warren Buffet when neither of them have any money.

  • whotookkarl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    It’s also not one or two billion, it’s multiple hundreds of billion owned by one person. I don’t think you can overstress the difference in scale between millions, hundred millions, billions, and hundred billions.

    There used to be taxes assessed by total asset valuation that focused more on wealthy individuals because they don’t earn as much from income it’s mostly assets increasing in value like property or ownership shares, that was stopped when they introduced the income tax that mostly targets low and middle class people who almost exclusively earn by income.

    Loopholes like offshore accounts used to dodge income taxes by higher earners should be illegal, but the whole system is backwards forcing the least prosperous to shoulder the largest tax burden instead of the wealthiest who benefit from society the most.

    • hellofriend@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      What’s stopping the wealthy from just up and leaving? They could liquidate their assets and invest in somewhere with tax laws more favourable to them.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Liquidate to who? Are those assets things they can take with them, or are they things like buildings that stay right where they are?

        • hellofriend@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          Anyone who would buy. Unless you’re sentimentally attached to something then I doubt you’d have a difficult time selling it. Billionaires own property as investment, not for use. Just sell it to another billionaire and buy property in a country more favourable to you. As for things like cars, collections, yachts, and other such mobile assets, just stick them on a container ship and unpack at your destination.

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            6 months ago

            But then there has to be at least one billionaire who is staying right there, and can be taxed.

            • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              6 months ago

              Yeah that sounds awesome let’s divide those 200 billions into 333 million people and let’s get a whooping one time only 600 USD extra for the month. Then let’s repeat it again.

              It sure will last foreverrrrrrrrr

              • Doomsider@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                6 months ago

                First of all 200 billion is chump change compared to how much the wealthy have. Second, spreading money would do far more to stimulate the economy than wealthy people buying yachts, flying into space, and visiting the Titanic.

                I am sure if you removed your mouth from the wealthy’s cocks for a moment you would realize how fucked up the situation is. But I know you will just suck it foreverrrrrrrrrrr hoping they will gild you into their club.

                • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Stimulate the economy LMAO 🤣

                  Bro just admit you don’t know shit about how money works and leave it at that haha

      • Skydancer@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        The fact that you already confiscated them. Since we’re talking hypotheticals though, you could confiscate those assets at the border. Or set up international treaties with a look-back provision.

        • hellofriend@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          See, what I don’t like about this is that if you have the power to confiscate a billionaire’s possessions for no other reason that they’re a billionaire, then there’s absolutely nothing stopping you from turning that power against anyone you don’t like. And I’m not talking “you” as in you specifically, or anyone with a sense of morality and ethics, but “you” as in the inevitable exploitative scum that would at some point hold that power.

          Now, if the confiscation is contingent on a billionaire commiting a crime then that’s another thing, but then the billionaire would actually have to commit a crime. And if you made tax law ironclad then sure, if they break the law then they should have their things confiscated in recompense. But that’s assuming that the trial wouldn’t be bogged down in court by a billionaire being able to throw money at the problem.

          • Malfeasant@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            6 months ago

            you have the power to confiscate a billionaire’s possessions for no other reason that they’re a billionaire, then there’s absolutely nothing stopping you from turning that power against anyone you don’t like.

            This is already how it is for poor people…

            contingent on a billionaire commiting a crime

            Weird how so many crimes are the things poor people do out of desperation rather than the things rich people do to coerce poor people to do the things poor people don’t want to do…

          • whotookkarl@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            You seem to be under the assumptions that hoarding vast wealth to the point of extreme inequality is benign and not damaging to society & individuals living in that type of civilization, and that limiting extreme wealth inequality for billionaires means they’re coming for everyone next with no limits. These are some of the main ingredients in cooking an oligarchy soup.

            • hellofriend@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              No, I’m well aware that it’s damaging and I’m not a proponent of the system. You would do well not to make assumptions. My problem is that the people that take power are rarely the ones who will use it with temperance. I see no way that the same laws used to penalize the accumulation of wealth wouldn’t be applied to dissidents regardless of class. Rather than having an oligarchy of private citizens, you’ll have an oligarchy of people with government powers. At least in the current system there’s a degree of separation. What’s needed is a way to strengthen the people, not to punish the wealthy. And I have some ideas for that, but I doubt any would be feasible.

  • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Who do I vote for to make this happen?
    Or is that French shortening device the only way at this point?

  • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    6 months ago

    Billionaires hold a tiny percentage of their wealth in money, so taking all their money away wouldn’t even make them stop being a billionaire.

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      Let’s remove their control of all that wealth, then. If they’re so good, they’ll soon be in control of more.

      • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’ll take some Amazon shares from Bezos.

        I would honestly hold them and demand more ethics from the company that I now “own a part of”.

        If enough people do this…

        • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          In this experiment, you wouldn’t have that power because you would only get a tiny fraction of the shares. The interesting bit would be to see what would happen to the company if everyone had a tiny say in what happens. Judging by the fact that most people are quite selfish, I think it may not be too much better for the workers.

      • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        That would be fascinating to find out. It would be such a badass move, too, if one of them were to give everything away to show they could do it again. I think it actually would be fine for quite a few of them. Their reputation would get them in so many doors and get them so many investors for whatever they get into after the big giveaway. To really do this experiment well, they would need to get plastic surgery and change their identity so they can really have a fresh start.

        It would also be interesting to see the effect it would have on whatever they were doing before their exit. I guess it really depends on who gets their shares/power. If it goes to the government, then in most cases, things would probably get worse, I’d imagine. If it somehow gets evenly distributed amongst the world’s population, that could be interesting. How would amazon fair if we all got 1/8B of Bezos shares? That would be quite interesting.

        • DancingBear@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          You’re a little biased against public sector, and seem to be in favor or privatization. I assume your incorrect understanding of public versus private sector efficiency is based on the cliche that public workers are so lazy or whatever.

          But here’s an interesting article discussing the issue. I myself am biased against private sector in favor of the benefits of public sector efficiencies (no profit motive for example). But it’s an interesting article.

          https://theconversation.com/pursuing-efficiency-in-the-public-sector-why-privatisation-is-not-necessarily-the-answer-13142

          • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            What did I say that made you think I have an “incorrect understanding of public versus private sector”?

            Do you mean that because I think the government wouldn’t be good at running a business that I misunderstood something? The us government is famously bad about spending outrageous amounts for simple things. Cups that cost over $1,000, toilet seats for over $10,000… there’s tons of things like this. That may be fine when you don’t have to worry about being profitable, but it won’t fly when trying to run a business.

            https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/19/opinion/pentagon-budget-military-spending-waste.html

            • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              IIRC the reason military spending is so extreme is because the US military is required by law to have the paperwork to prove their entire supply chain is domestic, as part of a worst case readiness thing. Could be wrong though, not like I’ve really looked into it all that much.

              • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                The US military gets so much stuff from other countries. There was a “Buy American Act” about 100 years ago, which still stands, but it allows for so many exceptions that get used very often. There have been a few other similar acts since then, but they all include well-used exceptions.

                • DancingBear@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  What does this have to do with comparing the public us military to a similar private organization?

                  When the service provided is influencing world politics and securing our country, I don’t think efficiency means the same thing. I also don’t think there are any other private sector businesses that could compare to us military. And even if there are, I would assume that all of their workers were trained by the us military.

              • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                You’re so cryptic. I don’t know if it is intentional or not, but you really don’t answer clearly or explain your reasoning.

                • DancingBear@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  I mean, I guess the us military is the largest military in the world apparently even if you added up all the other militaries together.

                  So by your logic there is no other private or public military that is better than the United States, but their goal is being the best, so but, and

                  If you are suggesting that the military of a government can be better run by a private organization, such as a corporation…. I mean, I guess you are saying that oligarchy and corporate rule is better than democracy?

                  To start with such a large organization won’t benefit your argument in any way

                  , and I suppose the service of the military is being the best?

      • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        What you’re describing would amount to either eminent domain or civil asset forfeiture, both things that you really shouldn’t be resorting to for money unless you’ve run out of all other options to cover a budget and have a spectacular plan to get the country back onto regular revenue with that money already in place, because that window can only be broken into once.

        • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          This is a silly thought experiment to point out that billionaires do not earn their own wealth, and you treat it like it’s proposed as an actual economic plan for the whole country?

          … rofl

            • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Because it is specifically NOT an economic plan. At all. It’s a basic concept that would have to be fleshed out in order to even have an actual mechanism to test. Eminent domain is silly, because very, very few people want billionaires’ wealth going to the government.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          The purpose is wealth redistribution, not financing the State. Ideally, that money would go to a one time expenditure like a tax rebate for lower earners or a stimulus or something. Revenue neutral for the State.

          • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I feel like that almost makes it worse

            Even assuming we could just get all the money with no complications, every billion seized this way would redistribute something like 3 dollars to the average american, because there’s a fokkin’ lot of us.

            What’d be better would be to turn that money into a sovereign wealth fund that can be tapped for crisis moments or unexpected budget deficits. Basically as a “fuck you we don’t need austerity” piggy bank whenever economic downturn prompts the right wing nutcases to start complaining how things like a functioning government are a waste of money.

            • PunnyName@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              Why piggy bank it when there are things right now that could, and would, use the money?

              Crumbling road infrastructure, social programs, implementation of better public transit, EV rebates, homelessness programs, library attorney’s fees, replacing lead pipes for water delivery systems, forest fire management, employment insurance, boosting food and cash aid for the needy, etc.

              • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Because we currently have money for those things and just aren’t spending it on them.

                Building up an actual lean time fund for actual lean times instead of engineered poverty that can and should be addressed with what’s already there is just good policy, growth is not infinite, and having an emergency fund available to make up differences can significantly smooth over bust times for the working class.

        • theneverfox@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Not necessarily. If you want to do a new thing, make a new rule

          For example, send them a tax bill for 99% their net worth. Offer to accept assets at the calculated market price and the government can sell it slowly, or let them sell it off for pennies on the dollar and submit their new net worth for an adjusted amount

          Obviously that’s super heavy handed, but you can slice it a million different ways

          • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            That would be interesting. Anyone who has over a billion dollars is forced to distribute their wealth across anyone who has ever worked for them. Even more interesting than this would be to do it for anyone who has ever worked for anyone else. All boss/employee relationships. I wonder how this would change the world.

    • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      6 months ago

      Well damn. I mean going to $5k a month from nothing isn’t bad (especially in the middle of a pandemic) but those health issues are sure to put a damper on your spirits.

      Instead of laughing we should give him props for putting his money where is mouth was and hope that he at least managed to get his health back.

      • kakes@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        6 months ago

        Once you’ve been rich, you get certain privileges that are difficult to remove from the equation entirely, like education, connections, and (at least generally speaking) health. You also get a lot of leeway by having a safety net to fall back on.

        But honestly, all that aside, big props to him for at least giving it a shot.

        • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          I Haven’t read about him…

          Did he admit defeat?

          Did he admit that being born into poverty vs wealth and wellbeing provide vastly different opportunity?

          Did he admit any use of said prior opportunity?

          Did he admit his weak will when he couldn’t go another measly 3 months to accomplish this one simple trick to stop being poor?

          Did he admit he couldn’t suffer through what millions do, what millions have to, what millions are forced to do, because of people with attitudes like him?

          Did he admit he’s a clown?

          • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            There’s a bunch of videos in that article, so if you have the time to watch them, you’ll probably be able to answer most of these questions yourself.

        • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          If he did give away all of his money then by definition he did not have a safety net to fall back on, no?

          Unless you mean being able to call on friends when in a bind. I must admit to not taking the time to watch all the videos, so I don’t know what rules he set himself for that, but I suppose it could also count, if it was allowed.

          But I mean, proving that theory was entirely the point, wasn’t it? He didn’t try making his first million from nothing, he already made it once and tried to repeat it. Of course he’d have some sort of relevant experience to fall back on, and generally, almost everything you’ve done once is easier the second time around (unless you get thrown an unexpected curveball like he did).

          • kakes@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            6 months ago

            I’m the furthest thing from an expert on this whole situation, but the fact that he was able to “give up” being poor once he had a health problem implies to me that there definitely was a safety net.

            • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Fair point I guess, although like everyone else ITT I haven’t watched the videos so we’re all just speculating here, aren’t we.

              Also, earning five grand a month is not exactly what I’d consider “poor”. In fact, it’s just a grand shy of a median household income in the US.

          • Malfeasant@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            almost everything you’ve done once is easier the second time around

            And yet he still failed. He quit after 9 months, that’s 3/4 of the way to his deadline. 62k is not even 1/10th of the goal. I get close to that just going to work every day.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        6 months ago

        It was pretty scammy. He got free food, free housing, and free product, which he then sold. Yeah anyone can be successful if they aren’t paying for shit.

        • vga@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yeah anyone can be successful if they aren’t paying for shit.

          Yeah no, that’s not true.

        • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yeah anyone can be successful if they aren’t paying for shit.

          You sure about that? Because there’s plenty of people living on welfare who never make it anywhere.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            6 months ago

            Tell me you know nothing about welfare without saying you know nothing about welfare.

            • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              6 months ago

              I’ve met and worked with enough people on welfare to know they’re not innocent angels for the most part.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                6 months ago

                I never said they were, but if you really did work with people on welfare then you’d know they aren’t getting anything for free. After you qualify for welfare most forms are aggressively measured against the exact amount they think you need to stay housed and fed. And that amount is almost always less than what’s really required. So there’s no overage to take advantage of, no house you can rent and sublet, and selling furniture on Craigslist doesn’t count as being employed for the work requirement. Further you’re not getting a break for your medical problems. You can’t just pull the ripcord and go back to being a millionaire. You have to tough it out on your job after the hospital stabilized you and turfed you like they do to all Medicaid patients.

                But no go on about their “character” and how they have to act like angels in the system currently crushing them beneath it’s bootheels.

                • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Okay, look. Attacking their character was uncalled for and I apologize for that. I’ve met some fairly awful people who were on welfare but also some really good ones.

                  But the point is, you said “anyone can be successful if they aren’t paying for shit” and I gave you an example of people where that’s largely not the case. Doesn’t matter if that’s because of illness, disability, or character flaws, “anyone” means “anyone”. So shut up and just admit you were wrong.

  • unreasonabro@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    And do what with it? Just, like, fund society and shit? how are we going to grow extra assholes doing that?

  • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    This was tested…sort of. He didn’t give away his money he just supposedly didn’t make use of it essentially hitting the road as a fake homeless and making money by selling stuff he bought on facebook market.

    The fellow was a millionaire not a billionaire and I think he went from nothing to ~50k in nearly a year. He called it off early because he was basically destroying his health.

    • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Yeah, with friends housing him and hiring him 🤡

      Not to mention that actually poor people don’t have a cheat code to get them out when their health suffers. Which then makes them less able to keep working at maximum mental and physical capacity.

      So this was nothing but a demonstration that nepotism and money is what one really needs.

      • golli@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        He could also take higher risks, since he knew that there was a security net to catch him. Much easier to make high risk/reward decisions, if the risk (e.g. going broke) isn’t actually real. He presumably also had an above average education and many other benefits. This is also why many rich people might end up building successful businesses. The average person might get one shot and either makes it or goes broke. The rich person can roll the dice multiple times (and might have learned something from the last try).

        Also disregarding everything even, if he had succeded: That would still only have been a sample size of one. I doubt anyone is saying that you can’t under any circumstances pull yourself out of poverty, but on average the cards are just stacked against you in many ways.

        Also i doubt that reselling second hand stuff is a viable business model for a larger group. Like sure in a large city a few people might be able to carve out a niche for themself, but the more people do it or the smaller the market, the less it works.

      • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13332399/Millionaire-Mike-Black-homeless-broke-purpose-ends-bizarre-social-experiment.html He made 64,000 before he tapped out. His trajectory is also not entirely kosher

        Eventually, a man with an RV allowed him to stay for several nights in his van. Black started off small and managed to make his first $300 by selling furniture online.

        Nobody lets a homeless stay in their van to bootstrap their buy and sell craigslist furniture business

        Three months into the challenge, Black’s entrepreneurial spirit appeared to shine through having set himself up as a social media manager, managing to land clients - while even coming up with his own brand of coffee.

        Most people who were homeless 90 days prior is going to be in a position to be appointed someone’s social media manager or else they likely wouldn’t even be homeless in the first place.

        Even with obvious cheat codes he couldn’t get more than 64k starting from “zero” wherein zero means being homeless in nice gear with your $1000 phone and unlimited internet plan with a health plan and a GP and specialists

        Throughout the entire project, we haven’t shared it with you, but I’ve been in and out of the doctor’s office.’

  • PirateJesus@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    A fundamental misunderstanding of capitalism.

    It’s actually just hungry hungry hippos. And hippos can eat smaller hippos

  • postmateDumbass@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Division of labor would suggest the people that are best at hunting money, hunt the money for the tribe while the others do other stuff.