you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 77 points 2 years ago (8 children)

Do you think billionaires operate in a moral fashion? That their journey was one paved to the top by the ethical treatment of others?

Perhaps we need a new morality because I find that operating inside of prescribed moral bounds is shooting yourself in the foot when making this particular kind of argument.

You operate morally, they use every dirty trick in the book, including killing you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -68 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    Just because some of them indirectly kill people doesn't make it moral to kill them. Maybe if it actually would make the world better, you could have a utilitarian argument for it, but as long as you just kill individual billionaires and not creating a new socialist system they'll just be replaced by new billionaires. As I said, regardless of whether it's moral to kill them, it won't help.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    All of them indirectly kill people. It's impossible to be a billionaire and a moral person, as a moral person would spend that wealth to improve the lives of others. You can say that "oh but this billionaire runs a charity!", but how much of their own wealth do they give to it? Would a moral billionaire rely on the money of others to make change in the world? Would they still be a billionaire if they truly wanted change?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

    Maybe if it actually would make the world better, you >could have a utilitarian argument

    I have no doubt it would make the world better if you kill them and distribute their money (in minecraft) to I don't know social housing, public hospitals and schools (not claiming they will be used with %100 efficiency or %100 ethically but will be orders of magnitudes better than what billionaires are doing with them in maybe all cases). If it turns out to be a billionaire whose businesses we are currently addicted to (not gonna name names but you know), then there will be a period of inconvenience but we will get over it and adapt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Obviously redistributing their wealth would be good. Killing them doesn't automatically give you their wealth to redistribute, and redistributing without killing them is also a possibility you seem to be ignoring.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    yes fair point. I am also ok to give them the following choices:

    1- live in a poor country with minimum wage with no opportunity to change jobs and a wealth cap (your annual earnings from other sources should be comparable to annual earnings of a minimal wage job). I have the feeling that after a couple months they will commit suicide. for billionaires directly affiliated with arms companies, this should be a country which was recently a war zone.

    2- trial by combat. no wait that is game of thrones got confused.

    This extra punishment's purpose should be to act as a deterrant

  • source
  • parent