A billionaire wrote this letter to Google a year ago. How likely is that Google's layoffs and actions since then are at least partly because of this? - eviltoast
    • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I don’t have a problem with people who create value and become wealthy. They earned it and created good jobs, more power to them.

      Hedge funds, most Private equity, etc can go fuck themselves. They strip wealth and destroy things.

      • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        58
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I’m not for people only interested in benefiting themselves being the ones rewarded most by society, let alone being the ones effectively in charge of society as they are.

        It isn’t heroic, benevolent, or even minimally pro-social to spend your life trying to accrue private profit for the sake of private profit. It just makes you greedy and selfish. Or as they call it with their orwellian language manipulation, “rational self-interest.” being greedy, selfish, and unconcerned with the effects your actions have on others makes you a vile, broken, contemptible person, and humanity seems to have forgotten that entirely, or at least we’ve been propagandized to forget it by the owner class.

        We punish people that dare to pursue vocations that benefit society, like teachers and paramedics, and reward selfishness.

        I can’t root for my own species in this state. Slitting eachother’s throats when there’s another dollar to be had by it. If this is truly what our species has chosen as it’s most practiced purpose and meaning, I want no part of it, and I will be grateful when it’s time to leave it.

        • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Comment on semantics:

          I’ve heard humanity described as being composed of “self-interested, rational economic actors” to help us understand economics.

          Like, we all want the eggs from the farmers’ market that were laid by the happiest hens. A farmer can assume we’re rational & self-interested when pricing her eggs so she can try to sell enough of them to make a living. $2/egg won’t fly because stores sell them so much cheaper.

          Think I’m saying morally bankrupt, anti-social hoarders have rational self-interest but so do normal people like you & me. I’m fizzling out here but either way hoarding’s bad :)

          • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Right, but there’s no term for being greedy, sociopathic, or engaging in hoarding in economics.

            They fall under Orwellian double speak terms that make them complimentary, “rational self-interest, creating externalities, curtailing redundancies” etc. Language designed to turn their sins into their achievements.

            Considering the central prominence of greed in our economy, it’s a glaring ommission that the capitalists and economists themselves seem to have forgotten that word, or to create an economic term for greed that isn’t complimentary.

            They are driven almost entirely by insatiable greed, yet the term is never uttered in their earnings reports or economic news.

            They seem to want the concept of greed as the pejorative it is to be forgotten entirely, despite it demonstrably being their core value.

            • SinningStromgald@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              10 months ago

              Greed is the best descriptive word and incredibly negative as you’ve said. No reason to make a more negatively charged word. The tale of Midas, and others, demonstrate how destructive and harmful greed is.

              Midas has always stuck with me since I first heard the tale and in a way informed who I am today, especially my political leanings.

          • CallumWells@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            With the amount of people who get manipulated with sales and other tactics I don’t think we can argue that humanity is composed of rational economic actors. There are some rational economic actors, but the vast majority probably isn’t acting rationally with regards to their economics. And that’s okay, because humans aren’t rational beings first and foremost. We’re primarily emotional beings. We make most of our decisions based on emotions, then we may try to rationalize our choice.

            It takes a lot of effort to be rational about things.

      • Neato@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        No one creates wealth alone. When one becomes that rich, they’ve stolen it.

      • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        In the sense that Jeffrey Dahmer and Jack the Ripper were also completely human, sure.

        Although that’s not fair to them, the damage they inflicted on humanity was of a ridiculously smaller scale.