Anonymous OP 4w

People with excess rarely die tragically, those with little do constantly.

6

Anonymous landtrust 4w

I weigh 130 pounds the capitalists wage violence on my fucking body every day because they don’t pay me enough to live

5

Anonymous OP 4w

1. Killing people wont pay you more 2. Even if it did, you can get paid more without doing violence

-7

Anonymous landtrust 4w

I’m not supporting lone acts like this, just not shedding tears lol. What we need is a change in government and economic system

7

Anonymous OP 4w

OK I thought you were celebrating it

-4

Anonymous landtrust 4w

Oh It’s certainly amusing to me, but it’s not particularly productive.

1

Anonymous landtrust 4w

lol look at the image they posted and think again if they’re “not celebrating”. Bunch of bums with nothing better to do than laugh at others’ tragedies😂quite pitiful tbh

1

Anonymous #5 4w

Oh I’m celebrating! Not encouraging it or saying it’s productive. But yes I am celebrating

1

Anonymous OP 4w

Enjoy I guess, you bum 😂

0

Anonymous #5 4w

I sure will 😜

1

Anonymous landtrust 4w

I neither celebrate nor mourn.

1

Anonymous #5 4w

How can they expect people on have empathy towards them when this is how they react to literal murder?

-3

Anonymous landtrust 4w

I will have empathy for a billionaire when a billionaire can have empathy for me

4

Anonymous #2 4w

I’m talking about me having empathy for your struggle

-3

Anonymous landtrust 4w

If you have more empathy for the ruling class rather than the countless people they kill with systemic oppression and violence I don’t want you as part of the struggle because you are against it

5

Anonymous OP 4w

I don’t have empathy towards violent criminals

-3

Anonymous landtrust 4w

Okay I hear you, But BlackRock execs don’t deserve sympathy.

6

Anonymous landtrust 4w

The only violent criminal is the exploitative bourgeois class

4

Anonymous OP 4w

So if someone breaks into your home and attacks you is that not violent or a crime?

-1

Anonymous landtrust 4w

if I hoarded incomprehensible amounts of wealth like a dragon then nah that's kinda the logical step, not the knight's fault

4

Anonymous OP 4w

A woman* died

0

Anonymous #10 4w

Gender has nothing to do with it, not everyone plays on identity politics like the right does

5

Anonymous #10 4w

As a woman I don’t give a flying fuck if she also was one 😂

3

Anonymous #9 4w

Lol, “incomprehensible amounts of wealth” is simply a matter of perspective. No one has billions of dollars in cash, yet you call them hoarders because their stock increases in worth. It’s like calling someone a hoarder because their credit score went up lmfao. (yes I know it’s not the same thing) You yourself could be “incomprehensibly rich” to some. I hope you give the same grace to anyone trying to rob or murder you.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

… they still have the money and the power that comes with it, who cares what form it’s in?

3

Anonymous #2 4w

Suuure I’m sure the reaction would’ve been just the same if that picture - of a mother of two kids - was on the OP. Lying virtue-signaling hypocrites. You’re fine with a barely millionaire mother being killed? If you ever make a couple million, would you be fine giving up your life as well?

-1

Anonymous #10 4w

I don’t think anyone should be killed, I simply think that her job ensured many millions of people will never own homes. If the concept of family is important to you then owning a home should be as well, and she explicitly denied so many Americans that dream

5

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 4w

What, so if you buy a 300k house today and it’s worth a million in 2030, you’re suddenly an evil millionaire with a lot of power? Or if you bought bitcoin 10 years ago, are you corrupt because it happened to blow up? Is it even about the money or the fact she worked for a real estate company? Because she most certainly wasn’t close to a billionaire. The best estimate I could find was $2.5 million, and she was 43

0

Anonymous #10 4w

The money itself was never the problem, it’s the exploitation and riding off the backs of real hard working citizens that is. I don’t know why you defend those who would gladly trade your existence for another yacht

4

Anonymous #2 4w

How did her job do that? Could you show me exactly how her job did that? Are all the janitors of BlackStone also culpable since their jobs promote its functioning? What are you saying here? Can no one buy homes from anywhere else? I agree that this company has been a strong negative on the housing market but to say that they - and only they - are the reason people won’t buy homes is ridiculous.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

Not everyone is ever going to have a home, so to expect that is foolish. Home ownership rates have actually gone up in the last few decades, believe it or not. They’re more expensive, yes. They don’t keep up with salaries, yes. But people are still buying ‘em. Solve the problem at its core. Promoting killing for perceived injustices is very very very precipitous. Soon you may be the one whose job is inconveniencing others and you will have excused it.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

Her job as CEO of the home-buying wing of blackstone was to buy homes off the market then rent them out without ever putting them back on the market, directly denying people homeownership. Not everyone is culpable but it’s a specific class that ensures we will never own homes. I never said they are the only ones buying homes, just that it’s indicative of a larger problem of corporations and the wealthy making life difficult for the average American so they can increase their bottom line

4

Anonymous #10 4w

Yes I know you “don’t think anyone should be killed”, but that’s a cop-out, guilt-shifting statement. You’re obviously acting like it was a reasonable thing for her to be killed, and that’s enough.

-1

Anonymous #10 4w

The truth of the matter is that 10% of the world population owns a vast majority of the wealth. Wealth inequality is the biggest issue of our time but we are programmed to ignore it because the ones who benefit own the media, the government, and the economy. We are all meaningless to this class of people and to think that we should care about their wellbeing assumes they would ever care about ours, when at the end of the day, they would gladly kill millions to see a line on a graph go up

4

Anonymous #2 4w

Those little black bars on that graph are the bottom 50% of the entire world, there is a clear disparity between how such a small percentage lives compared to the rest of the world

5

Anonymous #2 4w

More people than you may realize would trade in the life of some random person for some perceived benefit. Case in point, you being willing to trade in her life as a slam dunk on big corporations. How did this real estate investment company, and this woman specifically, “ride off the backs of hard working citizens”? Are the contractors and construction workers being underpaid or something?

0

Anonymous #10 4w

I’m not intending to defend corporations who engage in bad practices. I just don’t think all my problems lie with corporations, and especially not with singular employees. If I wanted to buy a house today, I’d work my ass off to save. It would probably be harder than 50 years ago, but it would certainly be attainable. The problem I would then try to solve is the zoning laws that prevent more houses from being built, and the problem of houses being held as assets.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

Homeownership is less obtainable now than it was even just 20 or 30 years ago. Before, you had people on the minimum wage (which hasn’t changed or been adjusted for inflation since 2009) able to afford to buy homes and go to college. Now you can do neither without taking out crippling amounts of debt. The reason for this is that, in order to increase their bottom line, the top 10% have made life nearly unlivable for anyone that isn’t making obscene amounts of money. Living paycheck to paycheck

3

Anonymous #2 4w

Used to be unheard of. Now it’s the norm

4

Anonymous #2 4w

Okay, do you think they only live that way because they’re taking all the money that YOU would otherwise have? I would also like to inform you that that 10% isn’t a static group of people that has always been and will always be. You could probably be in that 10% one day if you tried and got lucky with investments. 10% of that 10% also pay almost 100% of taxes, so they are financing yours and my life to a great extent.

-1

Anonymous #10 4w

This doesn’t mean they’re free from criticism, but it’s cheap to misrepresent them to form an easy villain.

-1

Anonymous #10 4w

The money that they have is in fact money that could be in the hands of those that need it. They hoard wealth and live in luxury while the vast majority of the world lives in near poverty. Class movement is another thing that was achievable in the past but is no longer a thing. You said it yourself, you could “get lucky with investments” but you are never going to get that wealth through work alone. The top 10% of earners paid 72% of the federal revenue in 2022, but the issue is not with them

5

Anonymous #2 4w

In regards to taxes. It’s with the top 1% who own a majority of the world’s wealth yet pay a disproportionately small amount of taxes compared to the rest of us.

3

Anonymous #2 4w

It was about 67% in 2020. So not less obtainable by a long stretch. There are more unique difficulties yes, but that hasn’t seemed to stop people too much.

0

Anonymous #2 4w

Increasing minimum wage is associated with a whole host of problems, some of which I recently found out myself. The most obvious of these problems is the lowered hiring. To your second point, if the rich were hoarding all the wealth among their top 10% cabal, the countries with the richest people would also have the poorest ones no? In the United States, that isn’t remotely the case.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

What that statistic ignores is that, again, in a time before any of us were born you were able to buy a home on the minimum wage. It is now outright impossible to do that without working yourself to literal death, but the minimum wage hasn’t increased with inflation because the people in charge are influenced by the wealthy to keep it low so they don’t have to pay their employees a federally mandated living wage

3

Anonymous #10 4w

The reason raising the minimum wage hasn’t problems to begin with is that corporations do not care for people, they care for profit. To raise the minimum wage is to eat into that profit, so instead, people live at unlivable wages so that the corporation can increase its growth

3

Anonymous #2 4w

What is an obscene amount of money? I used to live in a third-world country, I’ve seen real poor people. I bet they’d consider you obscene for getting a starbucks coffee. People also aren’t routinely getting paid minimum wage, and if an employer was offering minimum wage, those people would be free to seek employment elsewhere. Competition is the very reason no one is really offering minimum wages.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

We have all seen “real poor people,” we see them on the sides of roads or living in tents and struggling to find the next meal. Obscene is a subjective term, and it’s true that we live in luxury compared to others, but that doesn’t mean one can’t address the inequality that comes from a small percentage of the world owning a majority of the wealth. I bring up the minimum wage because it used to be a livable wage. A livable wage in 2025 is around $30/hour. It is physically impossible to live off

5

Anonymous #2 4w

Says who? My uncle moved way up, and he moved here from being poor in a third world country. I hope you know that stock options won’t buy you food to eat if you destroy the company by redistributing their stock options. They become worth nothing in the hands of the masses. Unrealized gains CAN be used to take loans and they can be sold, but that’s only if they retain their worth. Their worth is also contingent on the top execs you’re complaining about, not the technicians down below.

0

Anonymous #2 4w

Of $7.25/hr yet the corporations all collude and bribe the federal government to keep it the same and pay for “analysts” to go on air and convince us that it needs to stay low

4

Anonymous #2 4w

Not everyone deserves to live in luxury for the simple reason that they always squander what they have. Not everyone who lives in luxury stole it or don’t deserve it or whatever. Most people are right where they deserve to be. I support a social system where people aren’t penniless and dying on the street, but I certainly do not support one where riches are pumped out of a small group of people and distributed to undeserving people.

0

Anonymous #2 4w

The “real poor people” you refer to are often just drug addicted. That’s a separate problem. I’m referring to people who cannot get water or food or shelter matter how much they try. Do you think that raising the minimum wage would cause companies to raise your wage to $30/hr? Do you even know anyone, or have heard of anyone, that gets paid $7.25/hr. It’d surely have made it to tiktok by now.

0

Anonymous #2 4w

Minimum wage is irrelevant in this argument if hardly anyone is being paid it. Increasing the minimum wage would only cause more layoffs because it’s more profitable to get rid of someone wanting more pay than they’re worth, than to buy a robot that doesn’t talk.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

I’m a recent engineering graduate, I don’t think a barista should be getting paid as much as me. But if a barista is being paid $30/hr, then shit I should get a pay increase too!

0

Anonymous #10 4w

This is like when I was 12 and believed in the Illuminati, that some secret cabal of rich and powerful people were plotting against me specifically for some reason. Profit is driven by labour from the masses and valuable goods and services are often created by a small group of people. Those valuable goods are distributed by the masses for their own benefit. All we do is trade and negotiate prices. Everyone - as a whole - is getting richer, the problems we have are more complicated than that.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

I just thought of an analogy for the workers who keep a company working at the lower level: If I were piloting a crashing plane and you were reading me instructions from some pilot safety book, you would be an invaluable part of that plane. BUT you would certainly not be irreplaceable. Your role would be invaluable, but it would mean nothing without me attempting to keep the plane from crashing. That role could be replaced by any old passenger sitting in the back.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

There is a rich cabal attempting to control everything tho, 50% of humanity’s wealth is owned by less than a dozen people. Do you really not understand wealth disparities?

3

Anonymous #10 4w

I think this helps illustrate some of why people are paid so differently. Going back to the plane analogy, I’d imagine some passengers in the back would support tossing you off the plane and replacing you if you were ineffective. They would not however, support tossing me, boeing the pilot, off the plane. Sorry to frame you badly in the analogy, gotta advocate for myself yk

0

Anonymous #10 4w

Holy yap, time to go to bed

2

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 4w

Do you? What do you think wealth is? What do you think Elon Musk’s $400B or whatever it is, is? You think he added everyone in the US to spot him $1000 to make up that pile of cash? Or maybe that money didn’t exist before him🤔. And that money still doesn’t technically exist. It’s just a ballpark of how much he’s worth at the time of assessment. It could easily go down if he does something stupid enough. Sure he could take loans and he could also liquidate some of it, but so what?

0

Anonymous #10 4w

Wealth is mostly power and influence that’s backed by some measure of material value. And while it makes up a small percentage as of now, if at all. Elon’s original source of wealth was his families use of slave labor in South Africa. And through a mix of screwing over his coworkers and stealing credit for various inventions, his wealth grew.

3

Anonymous #10 4w

You think we should say as a society, “No one should ever create enough value to be worth so and so amount” because that’s just too much value lol. All that money doesn’t exist fr, if those 12 people you mentioned liquidated all their assets, there wouldn’t be enough value left to pay them with. It’s mostly just a number similar to a credit score. If they didn’t create value, it wouldn’t exist. And if people didn’t like it, it wouldn’t exist either.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

If you took away Amazon or Walmart or even fkn BlackRock, a whole hell of a lot of people would be worse off than if you took away my and your net worths combined. Those people and companies have their problems but existing isn’t one of those problems.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

You misunderstand me. I don’t think “no one should ever create enough value to be worth so and so amount.” It’s more like “no one COULD ever create enough value to be worth so and so amount without major human rights violations and/or market manipulation.”

2

Anonymous #10 4w

…BlackRock literally caused the housing crisis. Like, purposely. People are better off without them wtf are you talking about?

2

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 4w

You think no one could ever create that much wealth, who are you to say that? What number in dollars would you estimate a single person is capable of producing? If you could attach a dollar amount to the contributions of, say, Sir Issac Newton, how much would you decide? How about the motorcar inventor, Karl Benz. How many motorcars have been created and purchased since he built the “first” one.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

“Who are you to say that?” Someone with basic logic, I’ll demonstrate. If you’re one of those “only hard workers make the most money people”, do you honestly think the average billionaire works 100,000x harder than you do to earn their daily wage?

2

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 4w

Do you even know what BlackRock owns?? Do you think removing BlackRock from existing would magically make people able to buy homes? Were people disproportionately able to buy homes before blackrock came info existence or something? The fact that they exist and are doing something bad doesn’t mean taking them away would make things better.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

Obviously I don’t think they should be wiped from existence, what a weird strawman. They should be made an example of, stripped of a vast amount of their assets, and reforms should be put in place to prevent similar market manipulations from happening in the future. “Do you even know what BlackRock owns??” Yes? Google is free.

3

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 4w

No, I don’t think value is a function of hard work. I’ll demonstrate. If I decided to carry a wheelbarrow on top of my head for a mile instead of wheeling it all that way, I will have worked harder but I’d also be a dumbass. I would also probably advocate for better treatment or pay from others on the basis of my harder labor. But I would still be a dumbass. Idk if it’s 100,000x but they sure created a hell of a lot more value than me.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

So did the inventor of the polio vaccine, but some things sell better than others. If everyone hates the products from these people and we think we don’t need them so much, it should be easy to let go of all of it and be self-sustained.

1

Anonymous #10 4w

“Idk if it’s 100,000x, but they sure created a hell of a lot more value than me.” That’s the thing, if you’re working honestly, like the other people in your hypothetical, they would be making more value. But the amount of value a billionaire makes compared to the average person is incomprehensible. It falls apart in your scenario, eventually, the only way to increase profits further is to screw over other people.

3

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 4w

Well, you said people would be better off “without them”, so I’d correct that. So you know that Blackrock isn’t just a real estate firm and people are not, in fact, better off without them. MAYBE reforms would help, but not if you’re the one reforming them. I wouldn’t even trust the government to do it.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

I morso meant that if BlackRock wasn’t founded, then BlackRock wouldn’t have caused the 2008 housing crisis, and millions of lives wouldn’t have been ruined. All the while BlackRock was making bank, and faced no consequences. But yeah, I guess we don’t really need reforms, do we?

3

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 4w

What do you mean? I often hear people say that it’s impossible to “spend” all of those unrealized gains in one lifetime, but I’d find it pretty difficult to spend even 100 mil if I invested some of it. Working honestly does not equate to working intelligently or creatively. It also does little to drastically improve your earning potential besides making you a green flag to employers. If the Wright brothers or Karl Benz were still alive, I would take no issue with them being worth a trillion

0

Anonymous #10 4w

This is because that money is more a representation of what they’ve done; or what they own; or what their ancestors have done than how much is in their bank accounts. I also think that in creating such value, they have brought everyone else up with them by allowing us to fly around the world and travel really insanely fast. I don’t think they would be “taking” wealth from any of us, only creating it for us.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

So, by your reasoning, wealth has nothing to do with money? You seem to be on some crusade about wealth ≠ money, when that’s not what’s being discussed here. I don’t think you truly understand the level of inequality at play here.

3

Anonymous #10 4w

Again, net worth is just a valuation. It’s unfeasible to actually liquidate all that money. And there’s nothing real to buy that would require that much money, except a company or a country or something. I know that they can take loans using that valuation, but even those are limited. Banks don’t have $400B lying around and the Federal Reserve isn’t gonna print it willy nilly.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

So… that’s bullshit. That’s utter rubbish. Do you think Steve Jobs created the iPhone? Do you think Elon Musk designed every car at Tesla? No, all of the successful products they’ve “produced” were made by actually talented people who never saw 1% of the benefits that their bosses had. I appreciate the idealism, but it simply doesn’t work that way in this bullshit world.

3

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 4w

Yes, I don’t think wealth directly equates money. I think money only represents value, and value consists of real things like food and shelter and machines. This is why I think that if machine could churn out more food than could be eaten in several lifetimes, that machine would be worth the value of ALL of that food, and all the jobs it might create.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

Look, I could keep debating you all night, but I really need to sleep, I gotta go to the gym in the morning. Good talk.

2

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 4w

Are we not discussing wealth here? If I don’t think wealth is always money, is that not pertinent to the discussion. Money is just paper, it’s only worth something in the right conditions. That’s why saying a person is worth $400 billion unprinted pieces of paper is just a proxy in my view. Money isn’t inherently valuable, it’s only valuable insofar as we agree it is. If Elon liquidated his $400B, we’d quickly stop agreeing that his money is worth a damn.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

Real wealth is the value you’re able to create for society. If you’re always valuable to society and you can prove it to them, you’ll never be poor. This is also why some people will always be poor, even with a million dollars in their pocket. I’ve skewed a bit too philosophical but my point stands.

0

Anonymous #10 4w

I don’t agree at all, but I have to sleep. Have the last word if you want. Good night.

2

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 4w

Yeah, you got me to put my thoughts in writing which I appreciate. Good night

1

Anonymous #9 4w

But you don’t hoard wealth. But you still get robbed. Now what?

1

Anonymous landtrust 4w

Homeless people literally rob OTHER homeless people. But somehow it’s not a crime because the guy isn’t rich?

1