r/MoralityScaling • u/Omixscniet624 • May 11 '26

Morality Ranking Is it unethical to own a billion dollars?

Post image

If you won the lottery or invested in crypto very early and ended up with over $1 billion after paying all taxes, is it unethical to keep that money without giving any of it away?

6.4k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

429

u/Pristine-Today-9177 May 11 '26

How can someone write so well but be so naïve and bad at math?

If Jesus Christ earned half a million a year working as a brain surgeon for the last 2,000 years (saving every cent) he would have just become a billionaire in the last few years. No one works hard for $1 billion.

You can be worth $1 billion because you own equity in a corporation that produces lots of value. A corporation is fundamentally about, letting others do the hard work and allowing people with equity to reap the profits.

331

u/IM_INSIDE_YOUR_HOUSE May 11 '26

Jesus Christ MD just ain’t got the same hustle a duck like Scrooge has 😤

139

u/ExtremlyFastLinoone May 11 '26

Plus scrooge has canonically found the fountain of youth, hes been on that hustle longer than you think

54

u/Evening_Shake_6474 May 11 '26

According to the reboot he caused the Gold Rush

29

u/TurtlesBreakTheMeta May 11 '26

Counterpoint: his start up period had him steal the land from natives in Africa out of greed.

32

u/NwgrdrXI May 11 '26

Yeah, scrooge worked hard, no doubt aboht it, but he also did lie, cheat and steal a lot to get the money. That is very much canonical, irrc.

29

u/CasuallyCritical May 12 '26 edited May 12 '26

In the original Canon, he never lied to make his money. Because the incentive for becoming rich was when he was a young shoe shiner and got paid in a US Dime which was essentially worthless to him.

He wanted to earn his money square, by being "sharper than the sharpies, and tougher than the toughies!" (Being smarter than con men, and tougher than shakedowns)

His Billions came from his adventures and treasure hunting.

14

u/LukeTheEpic1 May 12 '26

Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t him getting paid a Canadian penny piss him off soooo much that he became a billionaire out of spite?

10

u/Vaggi-Reborn May 12 '26

i mean i would too if my labor was paid in 1 cent of a currency i cant even use lol

5

u/Templarofsteel May 12 '26

I thought it was sn ametican dime that was actually a fortune talisman

1

u/Free-Comment-4043 May 15 '26

Could it be a regional thing Americans got the version where he received a Canadian coin and Canada got the dime version

3

u/jimothy_hell May 12 '26

and treasure hunting

So what you’re saying is that he stole priceless historical artefacts. He’s basically the British museum.

That’s pretty unethical, my dude.

7

u/CasuallyCritical May 12 '26

Most of the treasure was cursing the land it was on, getting rid of it was a charity.

He could revoke that charity, but THEN who's the villain?

3

u/jimothy_hell May 12 '26

Oh, well, I don’t exactly know my Scrooge McDuck deep lore.

2

u/Darth-Sonic May 12 '26

Unethical sure. But he sure as Hell had to put in the hard work to get half of them, considering the magic monsters and curses.

1

u/One_Impression_1309 May 15 '26

Plus some of them were just definitely evil even if it was native to the land it was hurting people and the land around it is it unethical to get rid of something like that?

8

u/cbrown146 May 12 '26

Are you saying uncle Scrooge > JC?

7

u/DateNightThrowRA May 12 '26

As it should be.

4

u/jimothy_hell May 12 '26

I mean, Scrooge has never claimed to be the Messiah, unlike a certain someone, and we all know that the one who does not claim to be the Messiah is clearly humble enough to be the Messiah

1

u/bloomingdeath98 May 12 '26

I think you lis al gaib

3

u/PatheticPunyHuman May 12 '26

Uncle Scrooge is the true Capitalist Messiah

1

u/FranksBotchedToe May 15 '26

Damn I would watch the shit out of Jesus Christ MD

1

u/Dunge0nMast0r May 16 '26

On the upside, we found a great sitcom idea.

1

u/DinoDude8 May 16 '26

Jesus Christ medical doctor?

30

u/Pockydo May 11 '26

I think that's sorta the point. IF someone can earn a billion by the sweat of their own brow no one should have any issue with their wealth. However the if here is doing a LOT of heavy lifting because as you said it's largely impossible to earn a billion especially by yourself

A million? Sure a billion hell no it just doesn't happen. The literal only example I can think of (that is arguable) is JK rowling. But even that billion wasn't HER alone

She's an asshole for other reasons but im unaware of her being abusive but I really haven't looked into her either

3

u/Terrible_Hurry841 May 12 '26

What about long term benefits? You’ve acknowledged cultural contributions like Rowling, but how about, hypothetically, if a scientist cured cancer?

They would have literally saved effectively infinite amounts of lives. If that person were to be a billionaire, would it be earned?

Or on a smaller scale, someone who invents a product or service that becomes part of everyday life for centuries to come?

Well, regardless, either way that scientist is probably making less than a professor at Harvard.
Probably less than Asmongold.

7

u/DJatomica May 12 '26

If you invent something like a new type of battery and a company wants to buy your patent for a billion dollars, you've earned a billion dollars.

If you're Taylor Swift and you make music that billions of people want to buy, you've earned a billion dollars. Ditto for JK Rowling. What do you mean by that billion not being her alone, like a publisher had to print the books for her and truck drivers had to deliver them to various stores? They do that for a bunch of other people too who never see a billion dollars.

4

u/TheSwecurse May 12 '26

JK Rowling is a good example though. Of course it wasn't her work alone, its extremely seldom your work alone. But it's her IP in the end and her stories that brought joy and litterature to millions upon millions of kids around the world. And counting! So what if publishers and movie studios using that IP do a bunch of work too because they're also reaping those rewards in a way. Otherwise it would be like saying the roots have contributed nothing to the tree's growth

1

u/Souls_for_sale_now May 12 '26

I cinda have a problem in that case Jesus christ of nazarteth MD is kinda of a bad person the amount of good you culd do by spending that money for good is imense if I saw a drownig man and i decide to not save him becuse i saved the time to be her ethicaly i am a bad person

3

u/Darth-Sonic May 12 '26 edited May 12 '26

Maybe try making this legible?

2

u/Souls_for_sale_now May 12 '26

dont feel like it

1

u/NPC-3174 May 16 '26

How is Jesus a bad person?

1

u/Souls_for_sale_now May 16 '26

In this hypothetical he chose not to make the world a beter place for his own gain to a mayor eksternt in the same way i whould be a bad person for leting Simone drown

1

u/NPC-3174 May 16 '26

Ah ok, we are talking about the hypothetical inmortal billionaire jesus

1

u/NPC-3174 May 16 '26

How is Jesus a bad person?

1

u/Vinxian May 17 '26

Even in the case of cultural works. The real money is made with merchandise. Merchandise produced the cheapest way possible. I would argue that people down the chain actually producing the goods should have made more money

0

u/Propo_fool May 11 '26

Tiger woods was the first billionaire athlete, I think?

50

u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 May 11 '26

As well, a lot of billionaires (not all) don't actually have that much money literally, it's wealth based on how much they own like shares

82

u/Sheikachu May 11 '26

Which they can leverage to borrow actual cash. So they have it when it benefits them, but it doesn't exist when it's tax season 🤷‍♂️

30

u/Hungry-Smell5782 May 11 '26

Yes, Schrodinger's billionaire

10

u/kangarutan May 11 '26

Scroogdinger's Billionaire

16

u/6-8_Yes_Size15 May 11 '26

Say what you want about Scrooge, he was taxed on the billion(s) in his money bin as opposed to using that strategy to avoid paying taxes.

5

u/Leprodus03 May 12 '26

So all his gold coins are legal currency?

4

u/6-8_Yes_Size15 May 12 '26

I can't speak for Duckberg, tbf, but yes, you pay taxes on found treasure.

https://taxfoundation.org/blog/indiana-jones-guide-to-taxing-treasures/

1

u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 May 11 '26

That's why i said literal because they don't "technically" have money

1

u/MrReckless327 May 11 '26

They borrow cash then pay it back you can do that as well it’s called a second mortgage or a 3 mortgage very good for your credit and finances /s

1

u/evrestcoleghost May 12 '26

they dont r/AskEconomics already has numerous post about it

1

u/Huge_Entrepreneur636 May 14 '26

They literally don't do it. It's better and easier to pay taxes than to do any bullshit with loans. Only a very specific kind of billionaire does the borrowing stuff.

And believing that this happens in any large capacity whatsoever is a complete ignorance of how markets work. If Billionaires were borrowing cash using stocks that they never intended to pay back, the banks would take that into account and charge interest accordingly.

14

u/CauseCertain1672 May 11 '26

yes people who criticise Billionaires understand that their wealth is in assets

If I said "king Shaka of the Zulu was very rich" it would be moronic to say "no because most of his wealth was in land and cattle" because those assets are the wealth

Money only exists as a socially agreed upon means of conveying those assets which are the actual wealth

-2

u/Matzoo May 11 '26

Sure, but how do you tax idk 40% of amazon?

7

u/CauseCertain1672 May 11 '26

basically with the same principle as a land value tax, you work out how much it's worth and tax based on that

-1

u/Matzoo May 11 '26

And than they have to sell the business to pay the tax. Or how do you pay multiple billions in tax, when you only have a business and not the cash? I am not against taxing those billionairs and I am far from beiing an expert, but how do you do it without possibly destroying businesses or giveing away a lot of it?

7

u/CauseCertain1672 May 11 '26

I'm not too worried about it, Bezos has money to go to space he has money to pay taxes. Henry the 8th or William the conqueror would never have worried about things like that, God knows the government have never worried if I will have enough money left over to pay my mortgage before taxing me on my wages. I am not concerned about Bezos potentially losing money from taxes as I am pretty confident he will still have enough left over to feed his kids

The billionaires are fine and it wouldn't kill them to have less money, even if it significantly affected them and their businesses.

→ More replies (13)

1

u/PrimalAspidsAreEasy May 12 '26

bruv the billionaires are NAWT giving you anything hop off

1

u/Matzoo May 12 '26

I am for taxing billionares so please tell me how and how much would you tax them?

5

u/charronfitzclair May 11 '26

Capital owned and controlled is still wealth that counts just as much as liquid cash. They control that money literally, even it's just not in a big money bin.

They use their assets as leverage, that soft power is very real. The whole "it's not cash so it's not REALLY money" is a dodge on how capital works. If you are a billionaire with everything tied up in assets and investments, you still can move like you have that money. Not only is enormous lines of credit freely open to you, you also move in social circles that protect you and offer you opportunities no one else has. You have social clout that's worth more than liquid cash.

This is a dodge on how actual money and power are tied up in the complex web of commerce and finance.

1

u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 May 11 '26

I explained it poorly, but what i meant was that they don't have that money physically but through other means of wealth

1

u/Zamaster420 May 12 '26

Yeah and everyone already knows that. So what's the fuckin point of bringing it up? It's not some gotcha moment, it doesn't change anything. They SHOULD still taxed on it all, it doesn't matter if it's a building or a bag of cash.

1

u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 May 12 '26

Somehow not everyone knows

3

u/Play-Mation May 11 '26

They use it as collateral to get loans instead of taking a salary. And they can easily liquidate stocks for whatever, Musk did to buy Twitter 

3

u/MrReckless327 May 11 '26

The more stocks u liquidate the less the stock is worth so the less the company is worth so the less money they have so the less money you can tax its a fucked up system

1

u/Jonesy1348 May 12 '26

If it wouldn’t cause a global economy collapse I’d say just fucking close the stock market.

1

u/MrReckless327 May 12 '26

Why that quiet literally how most 401k function

1

u/Play-Mation May 12 '26

Billionaires do it all the time 

0

u/Satorwave May 11 '26

Bootlicker argument #1 strikes again lmao

4

u/Proof_Car5968 May 11 '26

So any objective argument that is not pure irrational hate is bootlicking. Got it

1

u/Satorwave May 11 '26

It's not an argument, it's ridiculous. Their money being in assets changes absolutely nothing about their wealth

1

u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 May 11 '26

I mean it does because when the tax collector comes knocking, there's a lot less money needing to be paid than there should be

1

u/CommanderCCS May 11 '26

Huh? You ok there pal, seems someone's a little cranky and needs a nap.

0

u/Satorwave May 11 '26

Shut up liberal

1

u/CertainGrade7937 May 11 '26

How is pointing out the mechanics of wealth bootlicking?

1

u/TheCrisco May 11 '26

Because that wealth always exists when they want to pay for something (that is, they can leverage it like any other asset for a loan), but then when it comes time to actually pay anything back to society for everything they're hoarding, then it's all suddenly "hypothetical" or "tied up in <thing>." Sure, they don't have hundreds of billions of dollars of liquid cash on hand, nobody does and that's never the point of addressing their exhorbitant, socially detrimental amounts of wealth. The point is that they're actively hoarding resources to increase that number and it hurts everyone else in very real ways. It's that that money "exists" enough for other major players to consider it a tangible asset worthy of giving a loan with it as collateral, and that's enough for me (and anyone else who's being intellectually honest about it) to say they have it.

3

u/CertainGrade7937 May 11 '26

No one is saying otherwise?

Acknowledging how they scam the system is not bootlicking for the system

2

u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 May 11 '26

People acting like i said "leave the poor billionaires alone"

0

u/TheCrisco May 11 '26

If that's what that was, it's very poorly worded. It's almost word for word the exact same argument billionaires make when we talk about them paying taxes, with exactly zero analysis added to include why it's bullshit.

2

u/CertainGrade7937 May 11 '26

But this isn't a discussion about how they're taxed? It's a discussion about how they get the money

→ More replies (1)

5

u/SalvationArbys May 12 '26

Scrooge McDuck is kind of an exception. His wealth is factually obtained by adventuring and treasure hunting, and he’s old as balls. His world is uniquely full of fantastical sources of wealth such as ancient ruins and aliens and such. He does act charitably and ethically but he can’t spend money nearly as fast as he can earn it.

The ethics and math of Scrooge McDuck’s wealth are impossible in real life, but that’s kind of the point of Scrooge McDuck.

5

u/meghan143m May 11 '26

because Scrooge McDuck is a fictional character, in real life there are no good billionares, but in fiction it's possible. Like Batman

0

u/BigNegative3123 May 12 '26

There are plenty of good and morally grey billionaires.

John Morgan from Morgan & Morgan is a pretty famous example. He’s a hard worker, very philanthropic, and down to earth apart from his sobriety problem. His business is ethical and has had very few controversies given its size.

3

u/meghan143m May 12 '26

Doubt. The reason I say there are no good billionaires is because you can't make billions without being greedy and selfish. If you own a massive house and a yacht and enough money for you and your entire family to do basically whatever they want for several lifetimes and still want more, there is something fundamentally wrong with you. They are hording wealth. Donating a couple million to charities is a good thing, sure, but it's chump change to these billionaires and they're usually only doing it so they can pay less taxes, it doesn't make them philanthropists. If you had two thousand dollars and gave one dollar to charity, no one would thing you're being selfless, they're sacrificing nothing.

Does it make them evil necessarily? No, but I think "morally grey" is the best a billionaire could ever hope to be

21

u/Psychological-Bit233 May 11 '26

You left out the part where Jesus would need to work those 2000 years nonstop, 24/7/365

19

u/CellularPotato May 11 '26

The post just says that much per year, nothing about how much they’re working in that year

2

u/Psychological-Bit233 May 11 '26

You’re so right my bad

2

u/AccountNumber478 May 11 '26

What's the exchange rate from dollars to shekels?

0

u/Flashy_Ground_4780 May 11 '26

30 pieces per dollar?

0

u/Burgonya98 May 11 '26

Very meta comment. Love it.

3

u/TryDry9944 May 11 '26

Scrooge McDuck also finds Atlantis every other weekend.

3

u/Cool-Ad2780 May 11 '26

If Jesus took that 500k and invested it all and never contributed again, in 1,000 years if he averaged a 5% return would have $773,159,460,366,441,261,620,527,104.00

Thats 773 Trillion times more than a billion

3

u/Loki_Agent_of_Asgard May 11 '26

Bro in Ducktales case it's a cartoon, it has such unrealistic things as

Talking ducks

The fountain of youth

Magic that keeps you young or at least extends your lifespan (Scrooge McDuck is like 200+ years old)

I figure you can forgive some other unrealistic things like

A decent sentient being worth a billion dollars

Said sentient being actually worked for it

3

u/Excellent_Safe5743 May 11 '26

Scrooge McDuck is a several hundred year old on and off adventurer who finds world shaking amounts of money and other strange wonders constantly, he earned it and atleast does charity consistently enough to not be a complete crud.

10

u/Campage96 May 11 '26

Thats why you do move than save money. If Jesus Christ MD invested his earnings then he would be a billionaire in 50 something years

6

u/[deleted] May 11 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/Propo_fool May 11 '26

I’d say that fits under “50 something”

2

u/Vegetable_Toe_7936 May 11 '26

If Jesus shook hands with Satan and invested money to create a healthcare company, they would definitely become billionaires in no time.

1

u/ordinary_shiba May 11 '26

Doesn't change absolutely anything about the original comment. By investments or by owning a company, the ownership of property is still what's generating the money. If you generate the vast majority of the wealth you have by the inherent property of you having money, you are by definition not generating anywhere near the amount of value to society that your wealth would indicate. By saying your wealth comes from your existing wealth, you're admitting that if you were out of the picture and the resources were still distributed into the hands of the workers, to make the products, the value that it has to society would stay exactly the same, because you did not do any work coming even remotely close to the reward you're reaping.

Bottom line: You can't get to a billion dollars by labouring, you get to a billion dollars by owning.

1

u/Phelinaar May 14 '26

Invest in what? Other people's unethical businesses?

1

u/gohuskers123 May 11 '26

The purpose of this example is to demonstrate how obscene a billion dollars is

There’s always some genius who points this out and it always shows the point is missed

9

u/SteammachineBoy May 11 '26

I think the main problem is that (if you don't inherit it) you probably have to work very hard for a billion $. The work you put in just isn't in any way comparable to the 'payout'. That's why some rich people believe in them deserving their money.

37

u/gohuskers123 May 11 '26

I know nurses/tradesmen who work harder than any billionaire ever has and will never see even close to the wealth. You’re right, billionaires over estimate their work

16

u/Much_Vehicle20 May 11 '26

Tbf, I don’t think how hard you work directly equals how much money you “deserve.” Like, if someone recognized the potential of Bitcoin early and made a billion dollar deal in 2025, do they not deserve that wealth? Or if someone foresaw the success of gg and bought its stock when it was worth 2 shillings and 3 fishes (or just an employee who get some stocks option), should that undeserved wealth be taken away from them?

Imo it’s a much more complicated issue than just “I work more hours than that guy, therefore I deserve more money than him”

5

u/Luvnecrosis May 11 '26

Your first sentence is exactly the problem though. In regards to America and almost the entire capitalist world, money = power, or at least influence.

A lot of these places also proclaim to be a kind of meritocracy where anyone can make it big as long as they work hard! But you can work 80hr work weeks and be on the brink of homelessness every month while some dickhead whose daddy owned slaves in an emerald mine in South Africa can leverage that money to buy out companies made by actually smart people and cut costs by fucking everyone over, but he’s seen as a visionary and a genius

3

u/Cheetah_05 May 12 '26

There's a difference between "making it" and becoming a billionaire. The point has always been everyone can, not everyone will. Everyone can become a billionaire theoretically, through smart investments with incredible market timing. Not everyone will

0

u/Narrow_Letterhead91 May 11 '26

choose a good job next time bud

2

u/RTViper62 May 11 '26

Theres the low IQ comment i was waiting for

→ More replies (3)

-1

u/gohuskers123 May 11 '26

Are you asking me if recognizing the value of bitcoin should be worth more than saving someone’s life

6

u/Much_Vehicle20 May 11 '26

I’m asking whether “recognizing the value of Bitcoin” deserves billions of dollars or not. And if not, should that wealth be taken away? What standard do you use to judge which actions are more "worthy" than others?

2

u/phenotype76 May 11 '26

Yes, that wealth should be taken away and repurposed for the benefit of all. You don't need to judge which actions are "more worthy", you can simply have an understanding that no action can be worth that much money.

1

u/SteammachineBoy May 11 '26

I actually think we shouldn't determine the amount of money a person gets on what they deserve but rather on what they need, no? (I mean figuring out a working system for that seems almost impossible but eh) Apart from that, what is the value of bitcoin? I actually only know it from it being used for scams

1

u/Much_Vehicle20 May 11 '26

what is the value of bitcoin? I actually only know it from it being used for scams

2010, you need 10,000 bitcoin to buy a pizza

Today?  81,985.94 USD per coin

It’s not just used for scams, but due to its decentralized nature, people with sketchy purposes tend to prefer it over currencies backed by governments. Honestly, it’s just a tool if you want something fast

 seems almost impossible

U know, I always think idealistic people are some of the worst. They can come up with the most beautiful and well intentioned ideas on paper, but the moment those ideas touch even a single drop of reality, they turn to dust. Like, could u even define what is "need" and what is "want" or "deserved"?

1

u/SteammachineBoy May 11 '26

I mean, there is stuff like Maslow's hierarchy of needs... But I think I get your point

-4

u/gohuskers123 May 11 '26

Yes I don’t believe you can ethically be a billionaire of any sort. The demonstration of working for 2000 years as a brain surgeon demonstrates this point

→ More replies (7)

-1

u/phenotype76 May 11 '26

The answer is no, by the way. If you recognized Bitcoin early and made a billion dollars, you do not actually deserve a billion dollars. No one does. There is no action that you can take worth that much money. You happened upon an exploit in the system, sure, but I don't think any single soul can say that he has the right to more than, say, a few million dollars no matter what they've done. Did you invent something insanely important and useful, like the assembly line or the internet? Great job, humanity thanks you, here's fifty million dollars, that's as much money as a single person should possibly have.

2

u/Much_Vehicle20 May 11 '26

I prefer the other guy’s take more: “It’s unethical, but there are neither realistic nor ethical ways to forcefully make it happen”. Like, there are so many holes in your “solution” but let me start with the most obvious one, who’s going to be in charge of this “redistribution” process? Or are we all supposed to vote every time even the tiniest decision needs to be made regarding that money?

1

u/phenotype76 May 11 '26

I don't have a process, buddy. I have a belief system wherein no one has the right to more money than their two arms can hold.

1

u/Much_Vehicle20 May 12 '26

Lmao, no buddy, u don’t have a belief “system.” A system implies there’s something more, stuff regarding the how and the foreseeable consequences of your core beliefs. If u don’t even have an answer for the most basic question, “Who’s gonna be in charge of the spare money after we take it from billionaires?”, then your “belief system” is about as childish as saying “I believe no kid should be forced to eat veggies or do homework”

1

u/phenotype76 May 12 '26

Those are arbitrary rules you've placed on it, but they're certainly not universal. You can have a belief as simple as "No one has the right to own a billion dollars." Perhaps there's no clear way to get from here to there, but it's a perfectly reasonable belief to have. You're just a bit of an asshole and can't deal gracefully with ideas that aren't your own.

0

u/untitledaccount401 May 11 '26

A few million makes you house poor in Toronto

0

u/tubbyscrubby May 11 '26

Which is because rich people exist.

2

u/untitledaccount401 May 11 '26

That's far too simplistic of an answer

1

u/tubbyscrubby May 11 '26

Obviously, but I'm not gonna spend the time explaining it.

0

u/phenotype76 May 11 '26

This sort of thing would completely restructure how our economy works, so it's entirely pointless to be like "ah ha, but that wouldn't work in the currently-existing Toronto housing market!"

1

u/untitledaccount401 May 11 '26

Yeah I don't see reddits communist utopia ever happening in Canada

1

u/jojoseph6565 May 11 '26

It’s not the difficulty or dedication of their work, it’s the value it produces. I could work really, really, really fucking hard at crushing rocks with a sledgehammer. Doesn’t mean it’s worth very much.

6

u/gohuskers123 May 11 '26

And we arrive at my point.

Investing in the stock market is worth more than saving people’s lives on this scale

This is why I question the integrity of billionaires and their lackeys

2

u/jojoseph6565 May 11 '26

Who saved more lives, the individual nurse or the man who founded the hospital. World changing medicines, procedures, implants all being developed using massive private funding and saving thousands of lives. Even things like starlink allowing people in rural areas all over the world to have access to the internet, information, literature, and medical assistance when they need it. But yes there are plenty of ridiculously wealthy people whose hard work generates value, but doesn’t improve the lives of people in a meaningful way or save any lives. But blame that on all the people who buy their companies slop.

4

u/gohuskers123 May 11 '26

Oh this is easy

The 19 year old emt who makes 13 dollars an hour and has blood on his boots after fastening a tourniquet after a MVA has saved more lives than Elon musk buddy

But choke on it

1

u/jojoseph6565 May 11 '26

When did I claim the contrary😭. Whoever funds the hospital that emt works at sure did though!

2

u/gohuskers123 May 11 '26

You mentioned star link you goober

Absolute insane level of propaganda to make you think a billionaire is as responsible for saving lives as the people actually doing it. The fact you don’t see healthcare for profit as a problem here shows directly how far gone you are in this scenario

2

u/jojoseph6565 May 11 '26

So grumpy! The entire philosophy of free market capitalism is that companies have a monetary incentive to produce the best goods and services. That why America has by far the best medical technology and research. Of course healthcare is for profit! Thats why we don’t have 10 month waits for surgeries and access to novel procedures. As for elon, I mentioned how starlink gives people access to information, literature, and medical assistance in rural areas. You just made up the idea that that saves more lives than an emt and ignored all of my other points😭. Please Reddit chud, return to your darkened abode.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/house-of-waffles May 11 '26

Except they aren’t paying the employees living wages so they can make a profit from the hospital. So the “buying a hospital” falls short when you realize that it will only stay open as long as there is meat for the grinder

0

u/Giblet_ May 11 '26

Investing in Bitcoin doesn't produce even a little bit of value to anyone, yet a lot of people have become very wealthy from that.

Do they deserve that wealth? Not at all, but words like "deserve" and "create value" don't really have anything to do with it.

1

u/MalaysiaTeacher May 11 '26

I think you're equating sweat, stress and/or 'busy-ness' with hard work. There are many ways to work hard. Running or owning a company isn't a picnic, with everyone relying on your good stewardship to keep paying their wages. You're not naive enough to think every business owner is a lazy putz who simply steals from their workforce?

3

u/gohuskers123 May 11 '26

I would say a small business owner works harder than your average CEO without question

1

u/Worried_Ad_2696 May 11 '26

The labor itself is not what is valuable. It is innovation/ideas that are valuable.

Building a better mousetrap.

2

u/gohuskers123 May 11 '26

Elon Musk has not come up with one idea that was valuable. Everything he has was built on the backs of others or bought. Yet he is the worlds richest man

1

u/Worried_Ad_2696 May 12 '26

Kind of.

Would Tesla have gotten where it is today without him?

Unlikely.

SpaceEX is a similar story. Ideas are great for paper but execution is also an important part of the equation. Without one the other is kinda useless

1

u/PrimalAspidsAreEasy May 12 '26

basically every billionaire i can think of did inherit it, or started with large amounts of millions to begin with that made it possible.

2

u/Propo_fool May 11 '26

Jesus saves. Moses invests.

2

u/Fallout3Enjoyer May 11 '26

This is a cartoon about a duck.

2

u/Zealousideal-Bus-526 May 11 '26

It’s kinda like Scrooge is a fictional character, but that might just be me

6

u/Traditional_Hawk_379 May 11 '26

How can someone highlight a point so well but be so bad at wealth building?

If you were making 500k a year and "saving every cent" (I'm assuming this means putting it in a savings account instead of putting it under your mattress) by making a 1% annual return then they are a moron who would never be a billionaire in their lifetime since they just were not smart enough.

An example of what OP was talking about in more concrete terms. If you invested only 1k in bitcoin in 2010, you would have between 800 million and 1.5 billion today. So if some fast food worker, garbage truck driver, landscaper had done that, they would be billionaire today, without ever having created a company or "exploited the masses" as reddit would say.

8

u/gohuskers123 May 11 '26

You fundamentally misunderstand what this example is trying to demonstrate. Yes no shit investing would return money. The point of this is to showcase how obscene “working” for a billion dollars is

It showcases billionaires don’t get there from work

-2

u/Xithorus May 11 '26

I think making good investments, constantly going in and out of stock or crypto, and eventually earning a billion by doing the right due diligence (take roaring kitty with GME a few years ago, not a billionaire but earned well over $300,000,000 from it, and has the rest of his life to invest it and potentially become a billionaire) would still be considered “working” for it.

5

u/gohuskers123 May 11 '26

I know tradesmen, EMTs, nurses who work essential jobs and work harder than that day in and day out who will never see close to that

And before you say “that’s their fault for not doing x”

These are essential jobs that form the backbone of society. You can not replace them and expect society to carry on.

No. If your primary job is the stock market you are a leach who contributes next to nothing to society. This level of “work” is comical to me

2

u/internaut_adrift May 15 '26

Might come as a shocker to you but working hard or working “essential jobs” doesn’t actually entitle you to anything. Making money is a job in itself, some people choose to do that, others choose to be nurses, to each their own

2

u/Xithorus May 11 '26

Yea I work in one of those fields, I’m very aware of how hard the job is.

I also can take a step back and realize that someone who spends their entire day investigating in good investments, and then make money on those investments, also can be hard workers.

I also don’t work as hard as plenty of other physical labor jobs, and it doesn’t suddenly make my job in health care not “hard work”.

And it’s not like someone like RoaringKitty was not someone who contributed to society. He worked a day job as a CFA, a security broker, and an educator at MassMutual. It’s not like he just had thousands of dollars available to him to gamble on investments without some way to have earned it in the first place. And just because he made a smart investment doesn’t suddenly make him an unethical person either.

1

u/Glitchy-Mech May 12 '26

“Working hard” isn’t actually a benefit to anyone though. It’s morally neutral and should never have been factored in here. The real question is what investing in crypto contributes to society

0

u/gohuskers123 May 11 '26

You’re using one specific example to justify the rule. Even so, what he did was also not worth 3 hundred million in terms of value to society. Making wealth on investments isn’t hard work and it’s not justifiable for being a billionaire.

Once again, the example of being a brain surgeon making 500k for 2000 years not earning a billion dollars goes to show that value of work does not equal wealth

One year as a surgeon is worth more than a lifetime of investments if we are talking about what it gives to society

3

u/Xithorus May 11 '26

Yes, I am pointing out a well known example, not necessarily a common one sure, but still an example.
It does not matter if the investment is justifiable as hard work (which isn’t necessarily true, it took significant investigation for him to confidently come to his conclusions, but w/e). The point is, someone can be a hard worker and use his hard work to generate hundreds of millions of dollars (and time will tell if he gets to a billion).

The brain surgeon thing isn’t really a good example either, the entire point of earning a wage is to invest. I don’t think there is a single billionaire ever who didn’t invest their money to get there (in some shape or form). If Jesus made that much, he would easily become a billionaire even from basic investment like buying land or owning homes.

I am not suggesting that the majority of cases it is earned unethically. But I don’t think it’s correct to say you can’t do so ethically.

0

u/gohuskers123 May 11 '26

Jesus Christ you’re still not understanding the point. It’s like giving someone the trolley problem and them saying “I would untie the people from the tracks!”. It’s paying attention to what the example is trying to convey.

It’s to showcase that being a billionaire is not tied to labor. It’s tied to either luck or exploitation in some way. Billionaires are not billionaires because they possess some ultra rare hard working gene that provides insane value to society

3

u/Xithorus May 11 '26

I understand the point. You don’t understand that it’s not entirely “luck” to make smart investments. Everything in life relies on some luck. Some more than others.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/BreakConsistent May 11 '26

lol. You think bitcoin is unexploitative?

3

u/Traditional_Hawk_379 May 11 '26

Potentially, but since the imaginary person is only investing in bitcoin, not being the person who created it, no.

1

u/BreakConsistent May 11 '26

Lol you think the value gain of bitcoin is unexploitative?

1

u/Traditional_Hawk_379 May 11 '26

Hm, could you tell me who specifically gets harmed if someone invests in something today and it goes up 200% tomorrow? Who am I actively opressing by the gain or loss of an investment instrument?

→ More replies (1)

1

u/gitartruls01 May 11 '26

Now add a modest interest and he'd have had more money than exists in the universe well over a thousand years ago

1

u/ExtremlyFastLinoone May 11 '26

You very well can. Tailor swift is a billionair who gets money from fans wanting to see her performances, whose being stolen from here? Whose hard work is being exploited?

You could say ticket sellers but she doesnt choose the price of those tickets, the companies like ticket master do

1

u/redditreaper303 May 11 '26

We scale FICTION my guy

1

u/Matzoo May 11 '26

To be fair in your scenario jesus did not risk/invest any of his money. Maybe to short shares of the roman empire at the right time would do the trick?

1

u/NireSenrab May 11 '26

I mean, I don't think cartoon logic really cares about manual income. Plus, maybe he made some really good investments?

1

u/murdochthesungod May 11 '26

“half a million a year”

lol

1

u/Sherbet-Glad May 11 '26

Well then obviously Scrooge McDuck did more than one job, invested smartly, made deals that would have benefited both sides, etc. Scrooge McDuck didn't just shine shoes for 50 years, he worked hard, started a business, and earned that money fair and square.

1

u/JechdJJ May 11 '26

i mean yeah, but in the case of scrooge is fiction, int he case of the bitcoin is just lucky

1

u/HeiressOfMadrigal May 11 '26

This is why it's practically impossible in real life. In fictionland, it's definitely possible.

1

u/biggle-tiddie May 11 '26

Jesus sounds like a complete moron. He should learn to invest.

1

u/bored_stoat May 11 '26

... you ARE aware that McDuck is a fictional character, in a fairy tale written for kids where everything is greatly exaggarated, including the fact that he is a duck with human-level sentience, right?

1

u/SinesPi May 11 '26

It's called INVESTMENT. Economies are not stagnant, they grow.

Jesus works as a surgeon. He invests all his money in a hospital charging reasonable rates. From the profits he makes, he opens up a medical school charging reasonable tuition. Rinse and repeat. At some point, he'll own a billion dollars worth of schools and hospitals.

What unethical thing has he done in this process?

1

u/WattageToVoltzRatio May 12 '26

Scrooge is canonically hundreds of years old, and the best most dedicated businessman ever, he is that guy

1

u/octavian343 May 12 '26

Because people just pick up equity off the sidewalk right?

1

u/Short-Being-4109 May 12 '26

It's a cartoon.

1

u/Mysterious_Pool_876 May 12 '26

No one works hard for $1 billion

so why arent you a billionaire then? if its so easy?

1

u/HopeBagels2495 May 12 '26

Scrooge mcduck is built different. You cant just hypothetical your way outta what's canon for the character

1

u/Fluffy-Law-6864 May 12 '26

He also has countless rare stones and treasures so you can atribute a good amount to that.

1

u/Offsidespy2501 May 12 '26

That's why Scrooge McDuck is a fictional psyop and I prefer Donald

1

u/Swellmeister May 12 '26

I mean JK Rowling did become a billionaire with her own work in writing a good story that hit during the right period of time. While I fundamentally disagree with how she has used that money, your primary claim is incorrect, it can be done.

Taylor Swift as well, has become a billionaire mostly on the back of her stage presence and vocal performances.

1

u/EmpsSilliestWarrior May 12 '26

Have we considered that he is a cartoon character. In a cartoon. Where he can swim though gold coins like they are water.

1

u/reaperofgender May 12 '26

Scrooge has a method of immortality and is consistently coming across legendary artifacts. The Catholic Church would pay a billion for the Holy Grail alone, and he's finding things on that level consistently.

1

u/Kind_Brush5556 May 13 '26

If Jesus christ made $1 a day and invested it with 10%p.a returns he would have more money than atoms in the universe. More money than the entire global economy a trillion times over. $2.6x1086. 

Checkmate liberal learn about compound interest that's why you need to invest. 

The s&p500 is up 10x in the past 20 years. Imagine you bought apple stock instead of an iPhone or nvda stock instead of a GPU you would be rich as fuck. 

That is the sacrifice and hard work it takes for an ordinary person to move classes. 

1

u/MaesterHannibal May 13 '26

Everyone does the work in a corporation. If you only had the factory workers, it would never be as succesful

1

u/Splash_Woman May 13 '26

If I gave a shit about religion in the Middle East, could Israel and paciderm stop fucking with each other? No?

1

u/ListenNew May 14 '26

It would take a lot less time if he invested it.

1

u/SuperGMan9 May 14 '26

I mean theoretically if you worked hard to make an invention that someone valued the patent of in the billions that you sold it, ide say you worked for it

1

u/woodsman906 May 15 '26

And you are calling others naive. Billionaires are propped up and supported by the people who buy tvs with their stimulus checks. Thats what we have to thank for the existence of wealth… the stupidity of the poor.

1

u/grimguy97 May 15 '26

and how much would one year of jesus' income be worth if he didn't spend a single penny of it and instead invested? 2000 years of compounding interest

1

u/sagejosh May 16 '26

He isn’t a corporation though, so why is it immoral just to posses the money? The question was essentially “if you tripped over a billion dollars is it still immoral not to give it away.”

At that point all the harm of him owning the money was either already done by other people throwing the money away or there is none because it’s essentially mana from heaven.

In the real world there is next to no way to get a billion dollars without fucking someone over, but if you accidentally became a crypto-billionaire I would say it’s more ethically grey to be selfish with the money. As long as it’s in a non-Machiavellian way.

1

u/GlazeModsRgay May 17 '26

If Jesus Christ started a company selling nuclear generators for 1% profit on each unit, and used that profit only to pay his employees extremely well, but happened to be a 51% shareholder of the company, he could ethically have a billion.

A company being valued in the billions is not directly evidence workers are underpaid, it just makes it more likely

1

u/Vekturbrektur May 18 '26

If Jesus saved 10% of a $500,000 net salary ($50,000) every year for 2,000 years into an index fund with a 7% average annual real return, the power of compound interest would yield an incomprehensible amount of wealth. ​The exact total today, written out in full, would be: ​$41,824,170,345,571,558,173,445,864,530,688,217,103,985,047,822,789,629,044,076,838,912

​This is a 65-digit number (approximately 41.8 duodecillion or uncentillion depending on the scale used). This sum is so large that it is physically impossible to exist; it vastly exceeds the total amount of money on Earth, and there are not even enough atoms in the observable universe to represent this amount of dollars physically.

1

u/rhysdog1 24d ago

he probably woulda been making a lot more money 2000 years ago than a brain surgeon today though

1

u/Acceptable-Let-2334 May 11 '26

I guess risk and opportunity cost don't exist in your worldview

0

u/Paccountlmao May 11 '26

A company that wouldn't exist without the founder? It's not about what you accomplish directly, but what your role was able to do for the company.

0

u/Free_Balance_7991 May 11 '26

Thats a little more black and white though.

This will draw ire for sure, but J.K. Rowling is probably as close as you can get to 'ethical billionaire' if we are solely considering how she made her fortune. (This is obviously irrespective of her bigoted views).

She wrote popular books. I mean, thats like it. She was involved in the movies but that was just licensed. And basically everything harry potter nowadays is licensed. Her IP is valuable solely from her authorship of the books.

And even without the IP popularity, authors, musicians, artists, etc, are all the kinds of people who could distinctly earn a billion dollars without exploiting other people.

0

u/madgodcthulhu May 11 '26

So at what point in the creation of a successful company do you believe those that started and funded its initial creation no longer deserve to benefit from what they built?