• Thteven@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    88
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    We weren’t allowed to have him, some rich people would have slightly less money.

    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      They’d actually have more money. They’ve had studies since the mid '70s that proved that if they’d just pay everyone a thriving wage, they would be richer than they are. This makes perfect sense when you realize that the entire system is designed to funnel money up to them.

      Cruelty is the point. They aren’t going for the high score of net worth, or bank account numbers. They are going for a literal body count. They’re intentionally causing needless suffering, because they know we passed the point of scarcity in the '70s, so once we finally fix this shit no human, or animal that we interact with, will needlessly suffer ever again. They are intentionally trying to destroy the climate so they can keep their power, and continue needless human suffering.

      • pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        You’re right in the first part, but their motivation is power. Money is just a very good way to obtain power. Cruelty isn’t the point, it’s just the fastest way to get money and thus power.

      • Asafum
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        I don’t know about that, there isn’t much of a point to it. I understand the idea of keeping the poors poor so they need to work. I get the idea of greed blinding them to the concept that higher wages = more money to buy their products, but I never understand the argument of evil for the sake of evil.

        Those people exist, but not in any number that should have a visible affect on our society. I think it’s more about blind greed and power hungry people.

        • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          There are only ≈2000 billionaires. That’s a small enough percentage of the population. Maybe not all of them are straight up evil, but enough are that they have set up the system to perpetuate needless suffering. We also have studies that prove that one harmful billionaire will cause more damage than 10 beneficent billionaires can clean up.

      • Thteven@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        I’m aware of the results. Are you aware of super delegates and how they skewed the reporting? Many people were discouraged from even voting because the polls showed Hillary with a commanding lead before the public voting even began. The DNC pushed Hillary through because they felt it was “her turn”. Idk about anyone else but I felt completely disenfranchised by their actions during those primaries.

        • marth_21@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          They also fought pretty hard against giving Bernie any screen time or any attention to keep it all on Hillary. I felt that the DNC decided who it was going to be before he even had a chance.

          • Asafum
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            What do you mean?? Don’t you remember as soon as he seemed to have a lead every supposed “lIbErAl MeDiA” propaganda outlet ran with “Bernie loves Castro!” “Bernie said a nice thing about Cuba! Communism!! Communism!!! Beeee afraiddddd!!”