-
14 votes
-
Vancouver’s new mega-development is big, ambitious and undeniably Indigenous
49 votes -
Why the world cannot afford the rich
42 votes -
Behind F1's velvet curtain
27 votes -
What’s ‘wrong’ with east Germany? Look to its long neglect by the wealthy west.
9 votes -
Ski vacations in the Alps are becoming increasingly elitist
28 votes -
Stop pretending you’re not rich [2017]
31 votes -
Why Germany is rich but Germans are poor and angry
35 votes -
Economist Gabriel Zucman investigates the wealth stored in tax havens (2019)
22 votes -
$100M will be left for Native Hawaiian causes from the estate of an heiress considered last princess
12 votes -
Are credit card points ever worthwhile?
21 votes -
Paradise (2023)
Paradise is an exciting action sci fi with a really interesting premise. What if eternal youth, was available to anyone with money... yet it involved literally sucking the life force out of others...
Paradise is an exciting action sci fi with a really interesting premise. What if eternal youth, was available to anyone with money... yet it involved literally sucking the life force out of others less fortunate than yourself?
The movie focuses on Max, who after his wife is unexpectedly forced to give up 40 years of her life, he desperately searches for a way to get her youth back. The movie is filled with the usual plot twists, cool sci fi graphics, true love and the like.
There are two truly interesting elements to this movie. The first is the cynical idea that if the rich could live forever, then they would be much more motivated to think about and solve for the long term health of the planet.
In this movie, only the rich can afford to extend their lives for as long as they choose, so we also see how that would severely impact wealth inequality.
The second interesting element of this movie is a series of questions very similar to the trolley problem. If you could extend your life, at the cost of someone else's youth, would you, assuming they were somehow reimbursed financially?
What if your youth had been taken from you; or what if youth had been taken from someone you loved. Would you take it back? Would you take it back as ethically as possible, or ethics be damned?
Could you give up your youth to save a loved one from an extremely unkind yet uncertain end, or is it easier to risk your life to save theirs than it is to give up eternal youth once you have it?
At one point in the movie, we learn it is easier to take someones life passively through the forces of economics and medical science, than it is to actively kill someone with a gun to their head. Which is the essence of the trolley problem. But it is also the essence of wealth inequality.
We could easily flip the switch, to improve the quality of life and length of life for many people, at the cost of one rich persons riches, but those with power passively choose to not do so. The movie doesn't philosophize anywhere near as much as I am doing right now, instead focusing on fast action, true love and cool sci fi. But I think perhaps this movie is a very subtle warning to the rich. At a certain point of wealth inequality, some portion of the population will want their fair share of the wealth, ethics be damed.
11 votes -
The US Supreme Court case seeking to shut down wealth taxes before they even exist, has potential to end existing tax worth hundreds of billions
33 votes -
What to read if you miss ‘Succession’. Indulge in priceless reads about the scandals and lives of heirs, heiresses, and the people in their way.
7 votes -
Regular Americans are getting richer
31 votes -
Roger Goodell’s bald servility to NFL owners has made him filthy rich
7 votes -
South America’s richest family doubles fortune on shipping bet analysts hated
11 votes -
Norway wealth tax pushes the rich to move to Switzerland – millionaire prime minister has embarked on a push to tax the wealthiest for social justice
41 votes -
Donald Trump inflated net worth by more than $2 billion in one year, New York attorney general alleges
15 votes -
How the kleptocrats and oligarchs hunt civil society groups to the ends of the Earth
20 votes -
New book argues stock buybacks are a mode of predatory value extraction leading to income inequity, employment instability, productive fragility
43 votes -
How wealthy "super emitters" in the US are disproportionately driving the climate crisis — while blaming you
34 votes -
We need to raise a lot more in tax from the wealthy but that does not convince me that we need a wealth tax
39 votes -
Massachusetts passed a 4% millionaire's tax last year. Now every public-school student is going to get free lunch.
71 votes -
US tax code blamed as wealthy see major retirement account gains
44 votes -
Mapping the ownership network of Canada’s billionaire families
26 votes -
US progressives in Congress unveil OLIGARCH Act to combat 'existential threat' of extreme wealth inequality
138 votes -
How the ultrawealthy use private foundations to bank millions in tax deductions while giving the public little in return
37 votes -
Study of elite US college admissions data suggests being very rich is its own qualification
55 votes -
Gini global inequality at lowest level in nearly 150 years
13 votes -
Shifting sands: US inflation’s changing dynamics
17 votes -
Are we in "late stage" capitalism? What's next?
I often engage in thoughtful discussions with my friends regarding our current socio-economic situation, and I find it challenging to discover a more fitting description than the term coined for...
I often engage in thoughtful discussions with my friends regarding our current socio-economic situation, and I find it challenging to discover a more fitting description than the term coined for it.
Wherever I direct my attention, I observe life increasingly being shaped by the well-oiled machinery of capitalism, a system devoid of inherent morals and existing solely to maximize profits for its shareholders.
To me, the notion of "late stage" capitalism implies a bleak future fueled by the insatiable demand for constant and unsustainable growth. This, in turn, hampers our ability to effectively plan for the future, as investors prioritize immediate gains. Consequently, our planet suffers the repercussions through climate change and the exacerbation of wealth inequality.
Moreover, the ruling of FEC vs Citizens United, wherein corporations were granted the ability to lobby as individuals, seems to have unleashed a relentless flywheel that perpetuates and nourishes the insatiable beast of capitalism and greed.
I am genuinely intrigued by the perspectives of others on this topic. If we collectively recognize that we are heading in an unfavorable direction, what steps can we take to regain a more positive trajectory? How can we incentivize prioritizing moral values and environmental impact over monetary gains?
101 votes -
The fake poor bride: Confessions of a luxury-wedding planner
21 votes -
Doomsday prep for the super-rich
21 votes -
Did money buy you happiness?
Conventional wisdom tells us money does not buy happiness, perhaps the opposite. "Studies" (don't quote me on this, just going off headlines/articles I've read) say happiness grows asymptotically...
Conventional wisdom tells us money does not buy happiness, perhaps the opposite. "Studies" (don't quote me on this, just going off headlines/articles I've read) say happiness grows asymptotically and levels off around an income of 70k USD (perhaps more like 90k inflation adjusted?). I would be interested to know how any of this matches your personal experience. Has your happiness consistently grown with income? If so, where did that growth level off, if at all? And to what would you attribute it? better consumer goods, more security, more freedom...? Have any of you experienced a decrease in happiness associated with growing income? I eagerly await your thoughts!
43 votes -
Welcome to America’s most elite girls boarding school. Let the hazing begin.
11 votes -
Taxing the superrich
11 votes -
Super-rich abandoning Norway at record rate as wealth tax rises slightly – flood moving abroad has come as a shock and is costing tens of millions in lost tax receipts
10 votes -
How Gautam Adani lost more than $50 billion in a week
4 votes -
Norway's fossil fuel bonanza stokes impassioned debate about how best to spend its 'war profits'
4 votes -
Battle for the nation's soul – Norway faces debate about gas and oil wealth
8 votes -
Are billionaires a market failure? And if not market, are they social failure?
I was reading this text from the Washington Post (sorry for the maybe paywall): https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/10/06/xi-jinping-crackdown-china-economy-change/ The opinion asserts...
I was reading this text from the Washington Post (sorry for the maybe paywall):
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/10/06/xi-jinping-crackdown-china-economy-change/
The opinion asserts that in response to liberalization of Chinese life, driven by capitalistic economic growth, is the reason that Xi Pinjing "cracked down in every sphere imaginable — attacking the private sector, humiliating billionaires, reviving Communist ideology, purging the party of corrupt officials and ramping up nationalism (mostly anti-Western) in both word and deed."
My conspiratorial brain latched on to the humiliating billionaires line, and started thinking about a between the lines message along the lines that billionaires are good and should not be humiliated, a subtle warning-response to the progressive grumblings here in the U.S. that a failure to support capitalism will result in totalitarianism.
Then I started thinking about the questions, are billionaires good for society? I had always held the position that a billionaire is a market failure (in my econ 101 understanding of the term), much like pollution. It is improper hoarding and unfair leveraging of capital into disproportionate and un-earned degree of pesonal privilege.
It is certainly a by-product of euro-american capitalism, whereby the desires and welfare of the many are trodden on by those with the ability to fight and to shape the regulatory machine meant to protect the interests of the common-wealth.
I see a few possibilities. One, is that my understanding of economics is wrong, and producing as many billionaires as possible is the ultimate goal of capitalism and in fact good for everyone, even in theory.
Two, it is indeed as I suspect, a market failure. And the failure here is one of degree, it is not, in fact problematic to have some individuals with significantly greater wealth among us, and is, in fact, beneficial overall, but to have some with so much more than the rest of us (wealth inequaility) is a result of getting in the way of a clean functioning marketplace.
Three, economic theory is working as described, and economic theory/activity is an insufficient foundation for the maintenance and success of a whole society, and we need to find a way to constrain it to its own sphere, so that it provides us with what we need to be healthy and happy, but no more.
I turn to the bright minds of tildes: am I looking at this right?
16 votes -
The super-rich ‘preppers’ planning to save themselves from the apocalypse
17 votes -
The economist who knows the miracle is over
9 votes -
Poor teeth - If you have a mouthful of teeth shaped by a childhood in poverty, don’t go knocking on the door of American privilege
13 votes -
How do politicians keep getting so rich?
7 votes -
Earn $20K every month by being your own boss
32 votes -
When times are good, the gender gap grows
9 votes -
The art market is a scam... and rich people run it
7 votes -
Warning of income gap, Xi tells China’s tycoons to share wealth
6 votes