To be fair, if I was a billionaire and I had the choice of helping ordinary people or doing something awesome, I would definitely pick to do something awesome. I respect Bill Gates for fighting malaria, but I would go for spaceships or robots.

[–] Holzkohlen@feddit.de 63 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Which is why not you, nor them should have so much money. We need to prevent idiots from doing idiot things by redistributing their wealth.

[+] Aux@lemmy.world -68 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Then everyone will be poor and the civilization will collapse.

[–] Tavarin@lemmy.ca 46 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh yeah, cause society totally collapsed in the 1960s when wealth distribution was far more fair than today.

[–] HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Also, the Indigenous peoples in North America did really well with no concept of money until the Europeans came. Some Indigenous communities have lower life expectancy today than was estimated to be before colonization.

[–] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Well, sorta… from wikipedia:

On the east coast of North America, Indigenous peoples of the Iroquois Confederacy and Algonquian tribes, such as the Shinnecock tribe, ground beads called wampum, which were cut from the purple part of the shell of the marine bivalve Mercenaria mercenaria, more commonly known as the hard clam or quahog.[2] White beads were cut from the white part of the quahog or whelk shells. Iroquois peoples strung these shells on string in lengths, or wove them in belts.

The shell most valued by the Native American tribes of the Pacific Coast from Alaska to northwest California was Dentalium, one of several species of tusk shell or scaphopod.[citation needed] The tusk shell is naturally open at both ends, and can easily be strung on a thread. This shell money was valued by its length rather than the exact number of shells; the "ligua", the highest denomination in their currency, was a length of about 6 inches.[citation needed]

[–] Aux@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

Really well? Oh lol...

[–] BigNote@lemm.ee 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Great concentration of wealth is also highly destabilizing. We are seeing this play out before our eyes in real time right now.

[–] GyozaPower@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If it hasn't collapsed with a few hundred people having more money than the rest of the entire world while also using it for selfish motives, I doubt it would collapse with a fairer distribution. But capitalism shills gotta shill

[–] Aux@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You know which countries are most "equal"? Poor African countries where people can't even afford fresh water.

[–] orphiebaby@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There are many problems with this argument; but it's 11pm and I'm sleepy, so have the first one that came to mind.

Those countries don't have a lot of wealth per capita to begin with, so it's not a goddamned equal comparison.

[–] Aux@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Sleepy or not, but equality doesn't mean crap.

[–] GyozaPower@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago

Do you know which one was more equal? USA in the 50s and 60s, when the tax rate for rich people ranged from 70% up to 92%. A time period where regular people could also afford to live comfortably (family and house included) with a regular job.

Sorry, your arguments are just bad and only show your ignorance.

[–] paholg@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's a large range between being a billionaire and being poor, silly billy.

[–] Aux@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

And there's a big difference between a society which allows everyone to become a billionaire and a society which forces everyone to be poor.

[–] salient_one@lemmy.villa-straylight.social 22 points 1 year ago

Helping ordinary people is the most awesome thing though.

[–] thrawn@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Gates has the money to do both, and more. It’s just sometimes better to let others do it instead— having your own space company means worrying about competition, contracts, and potential profitability. Meanwhile if he wanted, he could hitch a ride on any of their rockets with no effort.

Musk and Bezos also have the money to do both, but they merely elect not to. Perhaps in the future they will, like Gates, begin funneling more of their effort and wealth into altruism to improve their reputations.

[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

I'm an engineer, so my childhood fantasy wasn't to ride on a rocket, it was to invent a rocket. I did think it would be cool to explore space, but not as a test pilot or a tourist. To be honest, I don't think I'd go on one of those tourist flights even if it was free - I feel no urge to risk my life just to get a good view of Earth. Being a space colonist would be a different matter - then I'd get to actually use my skills to build stuff.

(The reason I think this is relevant is that a lot of these tech billionaires were originally engineers too, so I guess they also think like this.)

[–] fluxion@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

But if it's something awesome marketed towards saving humanity then do something actually awesome and impactful instead of distracting bullshit like hyperloops and Mars colonies on unrealistic time-frames and self-driving cars instead of public transportation. Endless talk and grand gestures when these people have the resources to really drive improvements/innovations in achievable realistic projects.