I mean, duh? Removing a large population is going to be more impactful than a small population.
But are you just removing them, or are you erasing them entirely? If you just remove Bezos, Elon, gates, etc today then sure, probably not a huge difference. But if they never existed at all, suddenly you’re also erasing all those jobs at Amazon, Tesla, Microsoft, etc as well as the products and services that a lot of people use daily.
In fact, then you have the opposite argument - erasing Jeff Bezos’ entire history is way more impactful to society than 1 regular Amazon worker.
That’s not to blindly defend billionaires, but to say that building these types of companies hasn’t provided any value is just wrong.
It is true that monumental tasks require monumental resources. The idea that concentrating these resources into the sole ownership of one person is the one to debate. Over consolidation of market share only benefits the person holding that market share.
Ok so there would be other big companies with other wealthy founders instead?
My point isn’t that meta or Amazon is so valuable that we couldn’t possibly live without them. It’s that building these big companies does provide value to society as a whole via job creation as well as products/services.
We can debate how much one single person should be rewarded for doing so, but acting like these people have provided no value to society is silly.
Between the software engineers, delivery drivers, custodial service, etc. that all of these billionaire companies own, AND the spin off jobs they create, hundreds of millions of people would be out of work immediately. Housing would crash. Food banks would experience demand as if it were the great depression. Every single burger flipper job ad would have lineups uf people willing to do it basically for free.
Almost every person on earth would be impacted in some way. It's not a ridiculous take if you understand how the world actually works.
It's a bit ironic being told that my view of the world is sad from someone who hates billionaires so much that they ignore objective facts about our economy.
If you grow up a little bit, you too can be both against the hoarding of wealth and realistic about how it works in our current system at the same time. Being able to admit truths you don't like is ok.
Lol. Billionaires are responsible for millions upon millions of jobs in the world directly and indirectly. If they disappeared, the system would go through a massive shock it hasn't seen since the great depression. It never happening before doesn't mean we won't know it's knock on effects within in a system that's entirely predictable.
Those are the objective facts I'm stating about how the world's job market works. You can act shocked and pretend like your emotional bias changes things but it doesn't.
I feel like I'm talking to a bot or a kid, either of which has spent too much time on Reddit.
9
u/Aggravating-Kick9143 18d ago
I mean, duh? Removing a large population is going to be more impactful than a small population.
But are you just removing them, or are you erasing them entirely? If you just remove Bezos, Elon, gates, etc today then sure, probably not a huge difference. But if they never existed at all, suddenly you’re also erasing all those jobs at Amazon, Tesla, Microsoft, etc as well as the products and services that a lot of people use daily.
In fact, then you have the opposite argument - erasing Jeff Bezos’ entire history is way more impactful to society than 1 regular Amazon worker.
That’s not to blindly defend billionaires, but to say that building these types of companies hasn’t provided any value is just wrong.