“People are in disbelief that they would be making this kid into a hero,” he told Fortune.
Attending a conference for CEOs in New York this week, just blocks away from the site of the shooting, George found that many were shaken and deeply concerned by the reaction to Thompson’s killing. “They’re having plenty of meetings right now to discuss beefing up security,” he said of the business leaders, even as some question how much security coverage is enough. People are asking themselves, “‘What does that say about our society? Where’s our society going?’” George said.
So they’ve learned absolutely nothing.
Plenty of meetings to beef up security. How about plenty of meetings to understand how your greed has caused this? They sound one logical leap (that they are unwilling to make) away from understanding exactly what the problem is.
They managed to find one and only one CEO quote that reflected anything resembling self-awareness.
“When I was growing up, CEOs didn’t make millions more than everyone else in the company. I think we have to reflect on why there’s so much anger and do something about it.”
All I can think of is a TED talk I saw where the speaker had given some presentation to a bunch of billionaires and had some q&a, and one of them who had built a bunker for themselves asked him how they could prevent their security team from turning on them in the bunker.
The TED talk guy responded “Be kind to them?”
And the Billionaire said “But where does that end?”
I’ll try to find it so I can link it.
EDIT: Found it!
The guy is called Douglas Rushkoff and he wrote a book on the subject called “Survival of the Richest: Escape fantasies of the Tech Billionaires”.
I don’t think it was a ted talk, I’m pretty sure it was a seminar put on specifically by the billionaire class asking this guy how best to navigate societal collapse with their vast amount of resources.
This I believe was one of the exchanges at that event.
And it’s funny because the answer is build an egalitarian compound where your share of the labor is the funding. That’s it. If the guards see it as how they contribute to a shared community then they’re not going to turn on their boss
What’s incredible to me is that they don’t realize that societal collapse will render their resources more or less worthless. Their options are the same as everyone else’s: get a bug out plan, be ready to abandon all belongings, etc. What are you planning to do to keep your bunkers stocked past the first month? How will you pay your security if your banks are gone or your currency is worthless?
Exactly. These people don’t think rationally. They truly believe they’ll have a group of sycophants who will do anything they say because they had them all this time before.
When shit hits the fan, you need to be the only one with the keys to the shock collars. You need to basically become Batman.
You’re right, though I was first introduced to the story from the guy telling it at a TED talk. I phrased it poorly.
That video was freakin amazing and insightful!
You should make this it’s own post so more people can spread it
EDIT: Found it!
Wow, that was actually an extremely insightful conversation. Thank you for going out of your way to share it!
I’ll try to find it so I can link it.
Oh god please do.
I’m pretty sure it was the same guy who did the “it could happen here podcast.” Then they were like, can we put shock collars on the security guards. Stuff like that.
Robert Evans? The man is a national treasure.
If you haven’t heard his miniseries “Behind the Police” (ironically a four episode special in a much longer running serial podcast called “Behind the Bastards” which is not only about police) I strongly recommend it.
I managed to find what I was thinking of, but it concludes with a totally different line about them than I remembered. I think @neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com is right, and the “where does that end?” quote might be from a segment in a Robert Evans podcast.
Thank you!
Wait! I found it! It was the same guy from the TED talk, but on a different podcast!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nS3-dQen-YM
relevant part at 4:20
You rock!
Because CEOs are a symptom.
The problem is our investment economy that focuses only on the stock prices continually going up. It’s literally an unsustainable system.
If a CEO puts their personal safety over the investors, the company gets a new CEO.
They’re not the one really making the worst decisions, they’re the ones who agreed to take a shitton of money to be the face of the company and take all the blame.
CEOs don’t get paid for the work they do, they get paid to be the fall guy.
Still absolutely shit people who deserve zero sympathy, but they’re not the real problem, just a symptom
If a CEO puts their personal safety over the investors, the company gets a new CEO.
How many times will they be willing to get a new CEO before they make changes? How many times will someone accept promotion into that position? I wouldn’t take Brian Thompson’s job for any amount of money right now, would you?
How many times will they be willing to get a new CEO before they make changes
They’d do it on the daily if it makes them more money…
What do you think a CEO actually does?
They listen to what high level management says is best, and then just does whatever brings the stock price up fastet disregarding everything else.
There’s a reason they all get golden parachutes. None of them care past the last board meeting
They’d do it on the daily if it makes them more money…
Sure. They’d run a hundred grandmas a day through a woodchipper, each of them clutching a puppy, if it made them money. However, I am quite sure there isn’t a way that replacing your CEO daily, or even often, makes more money. And yes, I understand hyperbole.
I also understand that the impacts on a company of having multiple CEOs shot in a short period of time, or having multiple CEOs come in, try to be decent humans, and fired for it in a short period of time, would have destabilizing impacts throughout any sizable organization. They would run into problems with manpower and staffing, investment dollars, and generally the ability to do business. It would harm morale and reduce efficiency. And probably a bunch of other things I haven’t thought of in the 3 minutes I’ve been typing this.
How many times will someone accept promotion into that position? I wouldn’t take Brian Thompson’s job for any amount of money right now, would you?
I absolutely would take the job. I’d do it for a $1 salary even. I would have the power to make sure claims were approved, lower premiums on users, and call out the inequity of private healthcare from the top of the ivory tower. I’d be fired, but not before I was able to make some good happen.
And, in the long term, that wouldn’t even be bad for line go up.
Companies used to invest in their reputation, back when there was that 90% marginal income tax rate.
That’s the thing, you wouldn’t have the power to do any of that before you were booted out. CEOs do have a lot of power over the board, and the board has power over the company. The net result is that if the CEO pushes too fast or too radically they get removed before any change occurs. As the poster above said, in situations like this the CEO is paid to be the fall guy; the people who wield the actual power are the board members and the large shareholders. The CEO deserves a chunk of the blame for being the face of the organisation and legitimizing it, but killing one, or even a few, off wont significantly change the direction these companies are headed in.
If you made too much good happen, you wouldn’t be fired, you’d be thrown off of a moving train
thrown off of a moving train
It’s called “dying of an apparent suicide” and the authorities can find no sign of foul play. It’s so sad when this sort of thing happens. The company’s thoughts and prayers are with his family.
Ah yes, apparent suicide with two random, unrelated gunshot wounds to the back of the head
Fair, but in the context of a company being willing to just replace CEOs every time they have to fire one (or especially when someone shows up to fire the CEO for them, Luigi-style), I think there’s a small number of cycles they would go through before logic would dictate that they need to conduct business differently.
I don’t always agree with what you post, but you’re spot on here.
The problem is our investment economy that focuses only on the stock prices continually going up. It’s literally an unsustainable system.
Yup, this is the problem right here. Investments are supposed to generate returns, that’s the whole point. But Milton Friedman and Jack Welch decided that the sole mission of any company was to increase shareholder value, and the rest of the world rolled with that. So whenever these CEOs point to their Mission and Vision statements, unless they say “Our only priority is delivering returns to our Shareholders”, they are lying.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareholder_value
Economist Milton Friedman introduced the Friedman doctrine in a 1970 essay for The New York Times, entitled “A Friedman Doctrine: The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits”.[5] In it, he argued that a company has no social responsibility to the public or society; its only responsibility is to its shareholders.[6]
Meanwhile, we’ve decided that these corporations are people. Psychopaths who have no moral responsibilities to anyone but their shareholders, but people nonetheless.
Exactly. At some point companies need to transition from investment vehicles to institutions
Thus our efforts to make social justice a core condition for profits: fuck people over and get a boycott or protests or a label in media as toxic, and lose customers.
It’s not going well, as a strategy. It requires an educated populace.
I mean, every economic model out there “assumes rational actors,” which I’ve always taken to mean informed and educated. Too many of the masses are neither.
Yep, we have a word for continual uninhibited growth - it’s called cancer.
Elysium
Have been thinking about that movie quite a bit since all this went down, but don’t remember it in great detail. Might be worth a rewatch.
They literally can’t see the light for all their wealth because they’re calvinists believing: the greater the wealth, the greater the morality.
Well they did learn one thing though
They finally learned how it is to be a high schooler, having to live under constant fear of murder. I can’t wait to watch C level execs having tondo active shooter drills where they have tonhude under bullet proof blankets.
Mind you, murder is bad, and this murder on this CEO was bad, no matter how you turn it. I don’t want to live in a world where murdering eachother is the only conversation left.
Having said that, it is very gratifying to finally see these out of touch assholes having to suffer the same fear as all little kids in America
Great points!
Mind you, murder is bad
Yes for sure.
and this murder on this CEO was bad, no matter how you turn it.
I don’t want to live in a world where murdering eachother is the only conversation left.
Me neither. Let’s see if they are ready for any other kind of conversation now. OP makes me think they aren’t. Let’s not forget this murder happened because of all the other murders.
Same for stealing.
A company steals millions from their employees? Silence.
A guy stealing from Walmart? Police force everywhere.
Yeah, you missed the point
Teo wrongs do not make a right. The murder of this CEO was still murder. This CEO indirectly murdered thousands, maybe even hundreds of thousands and caused untold suffering. He was also apparently already on the hook for tax fraud and insider trading IIRC hearing in a news report earlier this week. He was a horrible man who should spend the remainder of his years behind bars.
That, unfortunately, is not the world we live in and I fully understand why he was shot. That doesn’t make it right, though. I don’t want to live in a world where you can be murdered without judges and juries and due process. We live in a civil society and that means that if you want it done right, everyone deserves a fair trial, even rapists, murderers or criminal CEO’s.
Yeah, I know that the US has a big issue with the justice system being damn near bullshit at this point, still doesn’t make anarchistic vigilante murdering an “okay” thing.
Do you want to live in a move civil society where everyone is treated equal, or do you prefer to live in a post civil society where it’s each for their own and we just murder those that we have a conflict with?
This murder of the CEO, as much as I understand it, is a step in the wrong direction. Maybe, just maybe, this will be the catalyst that will push society in the right direction and the US justice system will be overhauled and made fair for everyone and maybe the government will institute laws that will restrict what companies can do to make it fair for everyone… Doubtful, but maybe. Either way, it still is a step in the wrong direction and I do worry that the US is sliding off into a hellhole it will never be able to dig it self out of. This trump shit will inevitably make it easier for a few to abuse the rest. The few will control the news and narrative, and blame the leftz the immigrants, and at some point more on the left will start fighting instead of talking. Once the scale tips, there is no tipping back. Ask Yugoslavia how well that worked out for them. Oh yeah, millions of deaths later, it no longer exists.
How is that for a kind of conversation?
“Do you want to live in a move civil society where everyone is treated equal, or do you prefer to live in a post civil society where it’s each for their own and we just murder those that we have a conflict with?”
Oh, the first one, absolutely.
But we’re already living in the second one it’s simply obfuscated by an illusion of civility. When the violence is only directed downward, it’s somehow legal and civil, but when it’s directed upwards, they convince the public that it’s wrong.
Some of us disagree with that, and think that mass murderers should be punished even if the law won’t do its job.
How is that for a kind of conversation?
It’s fine, if a bit preachy.
It’s not in any way moving the needle on healthcare though.
Yeah, you missed the point
No I didn’t, I’m just not sure I agree.
Maybe, just maybe, this will be the catalyst that will push society in the right direction and the US justice system will be overhauled and made fair for everyone
In which case it would be a net positive, as it would save countless lives.
That’s a bridge too far for them, especially with particularly oligarch friendly policies of the incoming US administration.
That’s what makes it sooo good, they think they just got the keys to the kingdom but forgot the all the residents can bite back at any time.
The “what does this say about society” question bugs the shit out of me. It means that our society is sick and tired of being the only rich nation in the world where getting sick or injured will bankrupt you. If these people were truly concerned about the good of society, they’d quit sucking us dry for every dollar that they can and would advocate for a better system.
It also bugs the shit out of me because how long have children been being murdered in school in a mass shooting epidemic, but now that the rich are being killed that’s what makes them ask this? Our society has been in bad shape for a long time
Absolutely. The entire article makes it clear that they don’t even have an inkling of what it’s like to have to worry about your health or how much money you have.
deleted by creator
We live in a society!!
Most people don’t hate CEOs.
Uhhh, that actually might not be true.
If you were to do a poll in the US I think you can crack 51%, especially if you phrase it by mentioning that they have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit regardless of morality.
Edit: just had a thought. Given how much more money they make than the average worker, and that the average worker puts their health at risk by sitting at a desk so much, this might actually make sense in terms of risk/reward structure.
If the ultra wealthy make more than 1000 than me, shouldn’t they take 1000 times more risk of dying (I’m not supporting violence).
I would think that the title of CEO might not be appropriate to every organization either. I know a rather big org where the CEO is basically someone who begs for investors, and the CAO does what a CEO usually does. There are orgs where that’s the CFO, or the COO. Regardless of the title, it’s all executives we’re angry about because of the incredible income disparities versus actual responsibilities.
The executives I’ve met are essentially hype men or thumbs up thumbs down types. All of them were finance types or management types. To me, if your only qualification is many years of managing with barely any experience in the actual product/service your org provides, then that’s a problem.
Hospitals run by management types? Engineering services run by accountants? It’s all middlemen extracting piece of the pie from the people actually doing the work.
As a society we need to purge the system of middlemen period. The internet made middlemen obsolete, yet they are still exploiting labor in ridiculous ways.
I don’t hate somebody just because they’re a CEO.
I hate all rich people though that aren’t using their wealth to improve the lives of others as much as possible.
I mean, the likes of Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos could end world hunger with a snap of their bony fingers, and they’re not doing it, despite the fact that they would still be wealthy beyond comprehension if they did.
We’re asking them to do the bare minimum and utilize their wealth in a responsible manner, and they’re not even doing that much.
I mean, the likes of Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos could end world hunger with a snap of their bony fingers
Bullshit.
World hunger, which has in fact decreased drastically over the past century, is not a problem that money can solve, because cost is not the reason it persists where it does.
One major issue: food donations to poor areas tend to be hoarded and distributed unequally by the most powerful people in those poor areas.
So we’re one sentence in, and already we need to fundamentally understand local political dynamics and either use force to ensure equal distribution, or to change local leadership structures. This is already out of control.
You can’t just throw money at the problem and expect it to just be solved. There are real underlying societal and infrastructure issues in a lot of impoverished countries that need to be solved in order for hunger to be solved. You could ship a billion tons of food to a single starving region and there would still be millions of starving people.
Additionally, simply handing out food would kill the domestic food industry (because who would buy food when billionaires are giving it away for free) and would make the country even more problematic.
You should know what you’re taking about when you make ridiculous claims like this.
You can’t just throw money at the problem and expect it to just be solved. There are real underlying societal and infrastructure issues in a lot of impoverished countries that need to be solved in order for hunger to be solved. You could ship a billion tons of food to a single starving region and there would still be millions of starving people.
That’s a strawman. No-one said “they should just, like, buy enough food to feed the hungry”.
When people say it would cost x to solve world hunger, they are talking about those “underlying societal and infrastructure issues”.
So, yes. Everything can be solved with money. You can hire people to “fundamentally understand local political dynamics”, invest in research, pay to fund the programs that will enable impoverished regions to develop the means to build the infrastructure to feed themselves.
Additionally, simply handing out food would kill the domestic food industry (because who would buy food when billionaires are giving it away for free) and would make the country even more problematic.
Just because this is the idea you have in mind for how to solve hunger, and it is, as you rightly stated, a fucking stupid idea, doesn’t make it the only idea.
When people say it would cost x to solve world hunger, they are talking about those “underlying societal and infrastructure issues”.
And those issues cannot be fixed simply by throwing money at them, making “the likes of Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos could end world hunger with a snap of their bony fingers” a deeply ignorant statement.
So, yes. Everything can be solved with money. You can hire people to “fundamentally understand local political dynamics”, invest in research, pay to fund the programs that will enable impoverished regions to develop the means to build the infrastructure to feed themselves.
And then the warlords steal the food and redistribute it as they see fit.
You’re deeply naive about the reality of the circumstances in places where hunger is still a major problem.
The bottom line is, you can’t truly solve world hunger until you solve world peace, and you can’t solve world peace with money.
There are still places in the world where slavery is legal, for fuck’s sake. Do you really, truly think things like this could still be true in 2024 if money and what/who you can buy/hire were actually the solution?
And then the warlords steal the food and redistribute it as they see fit.
No, you are willfully misunderstanding my point.
There are still places in the world where slavery is legal, for fuck’s sake. Do you really, truly think things like this could still be true in 2024 if money and what/who you can buy/hire were actually the solution?
Absolutely.
Throwing money at solving the surface layer issues / symptoms is moot, but yes, for every new layer of problem you uncover you can ask “so what are the causes for that” until you reach something that can be fixed wit money.
Og, and I do not believe that this has anything to do with world peace. The nations on earth without hunger problems aren’t peaceful utopias either, after all. But on the other hand, hunger does seem to cause a lot of instability…
for every new layer of problem you uncover you can ask “so what are the causes for that” until you reach something that can be fixed wit money.
This is just a naive assumption.
The statement that a single billionaire’s wealth can not only solve world hunger, but do it so easily as to compare it to a snap of the fingers, is frankly, comically absurd, and exposes not only a massive ignorance of the root causes of the starvation that is still occurring in the modern day, but even for those issues which CAN be solved with an injection of funds, a massive ignorance of just how MUCH funding it would take.
As one tiny example, the US, a single country, spends over 1 TRILLION on welfare, not once or in total, but annually. And a mere FOUR percent of Earth’s population lives there.
Even the wealthiest human being on the planet’s net worth is nothing compared to what it would take to solve even the small minority of issues cold hard cash can solve. You have no sense of perspective and scale on this.
the likes of Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos could end world hunger with a snap of their bony fingers, and they’re not doing it, despite the fact that they would still be wealthy beyond comprehension if they did.
I’m reminded of this line Citizen Kane:
You’re right, I did lose a million dollars last year. I expect to lose a million dollars this year. I expect to lose a million dollars next year. You know, Mr. Thatcher, at the rate of a million dollars a year, I’ll have to close this place in… sixty years”.
Most, if not all, CEOs are rich though and I’m sure most people follow your sentiments too. It’s just that CEOs are currently the flavour of the month.
especially if you phrase it by mentioning that they have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit regardless of morality.
Also regardless of mortality.
Why would anybody hate CEOs?
(Btw this is just in the past month)
For the curious: https://musictech.com/news/industry/the-musicians-club-ceo-fires-99-employees-reddit/
This guy ran an online musical instrument business, exploiting unpaid remote workers. There is nothing of value lost here.
I can’t get inside the head of any of the crazies who go on a rampage and shoot up a school or a house of worship, but it gives me comfort to think that such people now know that if they shoot a CEO instead of a classroom full of children they will be regarded as having made a positive contribution to society. I really hope school shootings will go down after this, and I think they may well.
I know a school shooting up which wouldn’t be a huge crime. Back then, that is. Now I can’t be certain.
's what they get for looking down on everyone for so long.
Gleefully looking forward to the US not learning anything from this and moving on to the next gotcha moment! Seriously, the ship’s slowly sinking and I’m buying stock in popcorn and booze.
— “You’re never stopping anyone who wants to get to you.”
All my life I’ve tried to make sure people don’t want to kill me and I’m still alive, it seems like a winning strategy.
Careful, that sounds suspiciously like socialism!
It’s interesting to see that we may be flirting with a new era in which being kind has actual benefits.
My whole life I’ve watched kind and generous people be taken advantage of and punished by our societal systems. Trump is the best public example of how the antithesis gets you everywhere in this country.
Here’s an idea, make human life more important than line go up. I’m pretty sure that would get alllllll of your asses off the firing line.
Okay but what if we just sent everyone some stickers with our logo on it?
I mean EVERYBODY loves stickers. Then w we can keep making money, you can keep dying and you’ll have some great bling for your toddlers coffin!
Everybody wins!
Think of how few stickers are on the average toddler’s coffin?
I was thinking pizza party myself, all our employees (except the ones we fired for being negative nancies) love pizza parties.
But my capitalism!
What if the line going up wasn’t money, but the value of human life? 🤔
You mean, it’s all just about the lines we meet along the way?
We measure what we treasure!
But the cult of the line goes up says the line must go up, are you even paying attention to the line and whether it’s going up?
If you walk by the place where it happened, it’s business as usual, which gives me some perspective. This was a random killing by a mentally ill person. Let’s not turn a tragic incident into a trend. Most people don’t hate CEOs. They don’t care about CEOs. They have bigger issues to care about
I hope this guy gets it next. How fucking out of touch can you be that you dismiss this as “a mentally ill person doing mentally ill things”? What a fucking loser!
I love the last line. They do indeed, like how to pay for chemotherapy treatment after their claim got denied.
It’s insulting toward, what I believe to be, a plurality of the population. Luigi was a gift of a wake-up call. They’d do well to listen. Though, only government could really remedy the situation, and that’s not likely to happen. So we lurch forward toward instability. The powers at be seem more intent on transfixing the masses with fictions, distractions, and eventually: war.
This was at the end of the article Forbes presented me with:
Do you have what it takes to make it to the C-suite? Learn how Fortune 500 CEOs overcame surprising obstacles on the road to the corner office…
I don’t want to make it to the C-suite. That sounds awful. I want to help specific people solve problems they have helping other people.
Do other people think like this? Like they want a corner office and a big car? Am I that fucking abnormal that this sounds like a death sentence to me?
Actually a lot of “normal” people do want that.
And many even not very “normal” people may easily lose their mind thinking they have the opportunity to become powerful.
Maybe I’m more spider than man but with great power comes great responsibility and I recognize I’m not mature enough for that.
Yes, but you are not in a situation where you can have that great power and can’t be certain until then.
I’ve had a small amount of power and the responsibilities were enough that I never want any power again.
Do you have what it takes which is also known as inherited wealth
Lemmy tends to have skewed perception of such things. Truth is, most people want money. As much as possible in as short time as possible. There’s a multitude of reasons, from wanting a luxurious life, to simply wanting to not have to worry about the money or to retire early, but pretty much everyone wants money. Look at how many folk join the lottery.
Hell, most of Lemmy wants student debt to be forgotten. That’s gaining money, just in reverse order. Same with distributed wealth etc.
World spins around money, no matter how you look at it.
But sure as hell I wouldn’t like to be in a place I hate to earn it. :/
Truth is, most people want money. As much as possible in a
It’s not unreasonable to aspire to not having money worries, the stess of it is literally a medical issue eg not having to worry about meeting mortgae or rent payments, a mechanical breakdown on a car, or paying for a dental emergency, a broken limb, or buying a new pair of shoes, replacing your laptop etc.
Much past that is based on envy and that’s where it becomes toxic with wealth inequality. It’s human nature to feel envy, you can fight it but its inate in all humans, the ONLY solution is to recognise that and to remove it by removal of inequality. The inevitable end result of not doing that is the guillotine, social instability, or in this case a bullet.
However… :) theres a whole other issue of the people in the first paragraph, who see themselves as the “everyday volk”, being incredibly unequal to the other 90% of the world. So there’s an irony there that they need to use force to preserve thier own status quo, much like the C-suite rely on force to protect their status quo (police, army etc) . You see this play out in anti immigrant and refugee hostility, build a wall etc
Of those people who want more money to afford a comfortable life, it is much more rare to be mentally ill enough to want to be a billionaire and that is what is being discussed here really.
And on the topic of wanting more money to afford a comfortable life, that mostly exists also because achieving this comfortable and fear free life is made more harder by these billionaires who view services which should be basic social rights as sectors that they can squeeze money out of.
Wanting to be billionaire is not to be mentally ill. Who doesn’t like power without responsibility? Whatever moral framework you’ve got, most folk wouldn’t subscribe to when given option to be billionaire. Sorry, but that’s reality - power makes people drunk, and it’s only natural for us to want power - power to make our families and friends live better, to make people we despise grovel, to have all we want. It takes discipline and ideals to veer off into helping everyone.
And I agree with the lofe being made harder being the reason, but it doesn’t really apply to original comment I replied to.
sociopaths and children is who. have you ever been in charge of something important? something that actually matters to a number of people? if it turns into a power trip you need to grow the fuck up. it should be a humbling experience, that many people are relying on you take care of them in one way or another.
and to make people you don’t like ‘grovel’ is just maintaining a cycle of violence.
I do agree with you. I simply point out that a lot of folk don’t care.
Oh I am %100 sure at least half the world will take the option to be a billionaire. But that to me just means that the Earth is in a mental health crisis.
power makes people drunk
Yes and then like some people do (and some people don’t) they get addicted to that substance which makes them drunk and addiction is a mental health problem and quite usually with some other underlying causes.
They’re calvinists believing: the greater the wealth, the greater the morality. Taking it to its extremes is the point as is the cruel structural violence.
I want that.
I don’t want that. I want enough to live my life and nothing extravagant.
“suprising obstacles” lol as soon as it gets hard these fuckers just fuck off to a new ceo position at a different company.
And the only thing hard about being ceo is making decisions that suck for your own employees like cutting back homeoffice or fire/rehire and not have a bad conscience. But since these fuckers dont have any moral or loyalality anyways it isnt hard for them at all.
Every time I get a promotion I’ve had more and more distance between me and doing the actual work I get paid a lot more but I hate it. I have very little job satisfaction because the time scale of the things I’m working on has gone from days to months. Most of the time I just feel like I’m getting nothing done and it’s incredibly frustrating.
You guys are getting promotions?
Only because I fell into a role that was perfectly suited for my personality so it was easy for me to excel at it. Then my name got around and people started to assume because I was so good at that I must be good at other things too. Which has been pretty hit or miss…
People who read Forbes do.
I think large parts of humanity still desires enormous amount of money and are willing to spend their lives focusing on it.
It’s because money gives what people actually want - safety, respect, admiration, power, freedom etc.
its not a new reality dudes. you just did not know.
I’d like to see one of these publications post recipes for CEO stew.
I’ve been struggling to process my reality for as long as I can remember.
deleted by creator
Just wanted to comment on these two.
“I have to wonder if the demonization of corporate America and the wealthy over the last four years planted a mind virus in the assassin’s mind.”
Fuck you! You have the mind virus. A virus which leads you to believe that the rest of us should suffer because you’re better. Eat shit anonymous CEO.
“If you walk by the place where it happened, it’s business as usual, which gives me some perspective. This was a random killing by a mentally ill person. Let’s not turn a tragic incident into a trend. Most people don’t hate CEOs. They don’t care about CEOs. They have bigger issues to care about.”
Then light some candles and put out some flowers you fucking cowardly parasite. Hold a vigil, gather your CEO buddies and sing Kumbaya. Be sure and post the date online so all of the healthcare CEOs know when to be there.
Mind virus.
Lgbt.
Left.
Right.
Wokeness.
Immigrants.
Distract
Depose.
Deengage.
deleted by creator
Even left/right/center is scapegoating. Or rather divide and conquer.
And suddenly the divide is a commie one - proletariat vs borgouis.
Sorry about your daughter.
deleted by creator
I hate CEOs, landlords, royal families, and anybody else perpetuating the status quo.
Most people don’t hate CEOs.
The public reaction to this event disagrees with this claim.
Social media is used by a tiny minority of the population.
Thinking you can extrapolate what you see on social media into “the public” at large is the chief reason people on Reddit and Lemmy were so baffled when Harris got her ass kicked in the election.
Be more mindful of what’s true of “the public”, and what’s true only in the echo chamber.
95%+ of posts and comments have been in support of a murderer, barely any opposition, even on more conservative social media like Facebook… Sure, the general public is different, but even if it’s 60%, that’s still a lot…
Even if it’s 40%, that’s still a lot lol
That’s literally like take 10 people off the street, and 4 people agree. It could be 60%, it could be 80%, etc.
US income distribution is on the same level as fucking Russia. Bring back the tax brackets from the 1950’s and 60’s.
It’s different people. Those in US still own real things and do something with them to get such incomes.
Those in Russia steal.
In other words, in USA connections are means to help actual power and tools to actual power. In Russia it’s the other way around, actual power is all dependent on connections, which ultimately all go to one ruling group.
It’s nowhere as bad. But it will get as bad as Russia, of course, if Americans don’t learn something.
Hahaha. Just because it’s “legal” here doesn’t mean it’s not stealing. Taking billions in insurance premiums and then spending it to lobby to make it harder and harder to qualify to receive money for a claim is “legal” but so unethical and morally bankrupt that a guy just killed a CEO because of it and the entire country just shrugged and said “Yeah that’s about right.”
It’s legal in Russia too at this point. That’s not what I mean. Wealthy people in Russia own nothing really - they are just pockets of Putin. Less wealthy people are just elements of various mechanisms, legal and not, able to steal according to their status. Less wealthy than them - those who do honest business, but pretend the competition is not stifled by various invisible limitations by connections. The lower it gets, the more it is like normal stuff, but one can feel that something is wrong even arriving from Yerevan to Moscow, and Armenia is quite oligarch-owned too.
In Russia there are no CEOs to kill. People in such positions are kinda normal and everyone knows where real power lies, and those holding it can’t be so easily caught.
I misunderstood the core of what you were saying. Thank you for explaining it like this.
Dude, you have a self selecting Elite in the US and most other countries. It is the same shit. How many “rags to riches” stories still happen? And these ultimately also involve the right connections at the right time.
Look at the lauded “started in a Garage” tech billionaires.
Bill Gates?
His father was a prominent lawyer, and his mother served on the board of directors of First Interstate BancSystem and United Way of America. Gates’s maternal grandfather J. W. Maxwell was a national bank president.
At age 13, he enrolled in the private Lakeside prep school.[14][15] When he was in eighth grade, the Mothers’ Club at the school used proceeds from Lakeside School’s rummage sale to buy a Teletype Model 33 ASR terminal and a block of computer time on a General Electric (GE) computer for the students.[16] Gates took an interest in programming the GE system in BASIC, and he was excused from math classes to pursue his interest.
Zuckerberg? Haward student
Bezos? Princeton and then various banks, albeit his family background actually was lower/middle class.
Musk? Fucking apartheid mine owners.
No, I get how it’s in the USA. Matches your description. Still radically different from Russia.
Really? It feels worse than Russia.
You haven’t been to Russia.
I haven’t been to America either
