you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 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