• dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    10 months ago

    Incorrect. The only way to acquire a billion dollars in net worth is to exploit labor.

    Doesnt matter if they donated to charity. Its a tax shelter for them. Im sure Feeneys employees would have preferred to be paid higher wages.

    • crackajack@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      Maybe. But we don’t know how he managed his business. His wealth was, after all, came in the 1960s and 70s at the height of air travel which he sold his items to travellers, unions were also powerful and the world was operating under the Bretton Woods agreement.

    • rosymind@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      What if someone suddenly inherited 1bn from an estranged relative, or if they won the lottery? I’d say that’s an ethical way of gaining that much wealth

      I think what defines an ethical billionare from one that isn’t, is how much they share with everyone else and how much they consume for themselves. Spending that much money properly would take time. They’d have to vet charities, hire people to help them spend it on the best things, research where to invest in (i’m talking about things like green energy) etc.

      Just food for thought. I tend to like looking for exceptions to rules (idk why)

      • Croquette
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        There is no ethical billionaire because to amass a billion dollar means other people that produced that much value did not get paid properly. Simple as that. If you inherit a billion dollars, it was still made on the back of workers.

        • NAK@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          That’s just not true.

          Let’s say a person became a billionaire running a consulting firm. The going rate for consultants at every other consulting firm is paid $100/hour. Our billionaire paid their consultants $200/hour.

          Are you saying that wouldn’t be ethical?

          • Croquette
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            10 months ago

            No because if a person a billion dollars by paying someone 200$/h, it means that the worker produced way over that in value for the billionaire.

            That’s fine that a company takes a cut on that, but to get to a billion dollars, that means that the the company brings in way more than that.

            Usually, the salary of someone is roughly half the cost of the employee, so let’s say it cost the employer 400$/h for one employee. If the employer add a profit of 10% on that which is pretty reasonable, it would take 25 000 000 man/hour to get a billion dollars in profit. Or roughly 2800 years working 24/7, everyday of the year.

            For a more realistic scenario (40h/week, 52 week a year), that’s 12 000 years.

            That’s a scenario where there is only the billionaire employer taking a cut. Add other C-suites taking a chunk too and it gets more ridiculous.

            It’s not because other companies pay less that means that the company paying more is ethical.

          • Mnemnosyne@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Yes, that wouldn’t be ethical. It’s not a question of paying more than others, it’s a question of taking more for yourself personally than the value of the work you personally do.

            Let’s skip the consulting firm thing because that sort of business has a lot of ethical questions inherently, and just say they became a billionaire selling widgets. Let’s also posit that widgets are a useful, quality product that enhances the lives of those who purchase them in some way. And we’ll stick with your proposition that they pay $200 an hour to their employees.

            If they became a billionaire, it is still unethical. It means two things: their employees wages should have been even higher, and/or their product should have been less expensive. It’d have to be more than a vague hypothetical to pinpoint where the most unethical stuff is happening, but it IS happening, because a human is not capable of doing work worth a billion dollars in their lifetime.

            Inheriting a billion or more is not inherently unethical because you didn’t necessarily have a hand in accumulating it. However, few people will remain ethical after that, because it is difficult to possess that level of wealth without some of it being used unethically. Perhaps if you converted it all to cash and put it in a money bin, Scrooge McDuck style, you could know that your wealth isn’t out there doing unethical things, but there’s few other ways.

            • Tangent5280@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              I hope you try to practice what you preach brother, and not just type down long winded comments on lemmy on why your brain is smarter and your heart wider than all the rest of us sinners.

              • Croquette
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                What are you babling on about. I am not a billionaire and will never be.

                You have jack shit to say to you resort to insults. I’ll go low too, go back to sucking the dicks of billionaire and justify their horrid impact on human misery.