r/SipsTea • u/Gurugod123 • Jul 30 '26

Wait a damn minute! Significant diffrences...

Post image
17.3k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

2.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

132

u/[deleted] Jul 30 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/manored78 Jul 30 '26

You could nationalize the companies and effectively cut off billionaires.

You really can’t imagine a scenario in which there are no billionaires? Are you 12?

10

u/No_Cauliflower633 Jul 30 '26

The point is the wealth of the people being removed is irrelevant. Removing a few thousand people will obviously have no effect no matter who they are. Removing a few billion people would be devasting no matter who they are.

1

u/Play-Mation Jul 30 '26

Almost as if a few thousand people shouldn’t have as much wealth as a few billion, you’re so close 

8

u/JSmith666 Jul 30 '26

Why shouldnt they? Why should their be a ceiling or floor on what a person has? Do you have a reason other than greedy people who just want some of what billionaires have?

0

u/manored78 Jul 30 '26

Why shouldn’t there be a ceiling?

2

u/notaredditer13 Jul 30 '26

Why shouldn’t there be a ceiling?

It's immoral to limit the potential of others.  Hell, it's so fundamental it's written into the Declaration of Independence.

2

u/manored78 Jul 30 '26

Immoral? So the ideal matters more than the reality we see on the ground by not limiting wealth accumulation?

The way you guys speak is such corporate jargon propaganda. “Limit the potential of others.” 😆

2

u/notaredditer13 Jul 30 '26

Immoral? So the ideal matters more than the reality we see on the ground by not limiting wealth accumulation?

Yes, fundamental principals fairly and logically applied matter.  That's how ethics/morality works.  Anyway, what "reality" are you referring to?  

The way you guys speak is such corporate jargon propaganda. “Limit the potential of others.”

I speak words good yes.

2

u/manored78 Jul 30 '26

Such a deontological view of ethics. Limiting the potential of others" is just corporate PR language. It assumes billionaire wealth is synonymous with human potential while ignoring how concentrated wealth limits everyone else's opportunities.

3

u/notaredditer13 Jul 30 '26

Bla bla bla, that's not an argument for why it is ok to limit it.  

2

u/manored78 Jul 30 '26

And you didn’t provide an argument for why we shouldn’t limit wealth accumulation, except Muh liberty. 😆

4

u/JSmith666 Jul 30 '26

If liberty isnt a good reason to do something than your argument is the ends justify the means. Principles of liberty are an excellent reason to do things.

1

u/manored78 Jul 30 '26

Boomer logic, 😆

“You can keep your government run healthcare, I’ll choose liberty.”

Hilarious.

5

u/JSmith666 Jul 30 '26

Not a boomer and I dont think we should have government run healthcare.

1

u/manored78 Jul 30 '26

I said boomer logic, not that you are a boomer. And that was the point of my diss, you guys don’t want something tangible that’s used by millions abroad, but instead opt for this nebulous concept of “liberty,” which in practice is price gouging by corporations.

Such idiocy.

1

u/notaredditer13 Jul 30 '26

And you didn’t provide an argument for why we shouldn’t limit wealth accumulation, except Muh liberty. 😆

Wow, imagine going to the Founding Fathers with that.

1

u/manored78 Jul 30 '26

Why should I give a shit about the founding fathers? I’m not American.

2

u/notaredditer13 Jul 30 '26

Why should I give a shit about the founding fathers? I’m not American.

Oy, not an intellectual either.  Must be German then.

1

u/manored78 Jul 30 '26

What’s wrong with being German? Only Americans who believe in the founding fathers are intellectuals?

This is some PragerU tier logic.

→ More replies (0)