Ok so how does a cancer kill its host?
It grows until it consumes so many nutrients that the other living cells don’t get enough. The host literally starves even if he eats plentifully.
The same applies for the US: The billionaires are not only hoarding wealth, but by doing so they’re crippling the economy for workers and everybody besides themselves.
There is no goal other than to keep taking. They couldn’t stop even if they wanted to. It only ends when life becomes so miserable for enough people that violence becomes the only answer
Luigi knew how to cure this type of cancer. It’s not rocket science but nobody with the means and opportunity is willing to do the right thing for humanity.
We should start call them hoarders instead. They are just as obsessed and wierd about it.
Right? Billionaires should be seen in the same light as someone with a house full of cats and feces. Hoarding for the sake of hoarding is mental illness. Instead: we put them on Forbes and look to them as royals. Kill the rich.
Each billionaire is an individual problem AND allowing billionaires to grab and monopolize so many resources and even looking up to them is a systemic problem.
Without the systemic problem which is Capitalism and the shallow, greedy present day society, billionaires would be treated the same as other hoarders - seen mentally derranged and stopped from going too far for their own good and the good of others.
There will always be nutters, but if the social system we have wasn’t broken, this very specific kind of nutter would never be allowed to cause the damage they do with their mental disease.
At this point radical measures are necessary to right the wrongs committed by the rich. Taxes are a good start but not enough.
Jail sentences,
countless are dead due to billionaire greed. they are directly responsible.
life sentences for billionaires
Jail them and spend even more money? Naa, just eat em
they rich are an ethical source of protein
There is no law providing for such a sentence, so what you are talking about is either “make billionaireism illegal” or “extrajudicial punishment”. In the case of the former, we need a Guillotine Party to take over the DNC much like the Tea Party took over the GOP. Or, we need a guillotine party, French Revolution style, to resolve the problem-class at its source.
If I have a company, where I intentionally make choices that kill my costumers, that would make me liable for manslaughter, me and anyone involved in the deaths. why healthcare billionaires are not liable?
same with every other billionaire who profits from human suffering and deaths.
No, actually, it doesn’t make you liable for manslaughter. It probably doesn’t even rise to the level of civil liability for wrongful death. They are compliant with the law, and they make sure of that by having their lawyers write the laws. The “anyone involved in the deaths” includes the deceased themselves, who is determined to bear primary responsibility.
We can override the laws they are writing (Guillotine Party) or we can suspend the laws to hold them accountable (guillotine party). But jailing them without a conviction just isn’t feasible.
fuck the law. those laws let them off the hook because they bribed (lobby) to have those laws.
Just because a mass murder is legal does not mean it has to go unpunished.
The holocaust was 100% legal, and no one has ever complained that it is unfair to prosecute nazis for not breaking the law.
when the law is so unfair, you cannot use the law as an argument.
I don’t think you’re understanding me. I’ll see if I can rephrase.
There is no “jail them for life” option without the law. If you try to imprison them without the law, the law will just come in and free them. You’re suggesting a middle option that is simply not feasible.
I’m asking you to choose between:
-
“Guillotine Party”, a political party, much like the Tea Party, dedicated to stripping the problem-class of their excessive political power, perhaps by creating laws to justify their permanent imprisonment. We politically, figuratively decapitate them. This approach can (theoretically) jail them for life, by creating the law that would allow it to happen.
-
“guillotine party”, where we solve the problem-class in much the same way that 18th century France solved their aristocracy problem. We literally decapitate them. This approach will not jail them for life; this approach will execute them for anti-revolutionary activities.
While the specific details will vary wildly, these are the only two general options we have available to us to effect reform: politics, or force.
-
Overnight massive protests at their places of residence will help
Every person who kills a billionaire does so in self defense.
Literal parasites who consume everything and offer nothing in return
deleted by creator
The (original) Nazis are rightfully considered monsters for killing millions of people in the 20th century. What will any survivors of the incineration of earth consider the billionaires that are killing BILLIONS of us for greed?
never, next question
Figuratively, but yes, I agree.
actually yes, figuratively is the word that i should have used.
Suppose you spend 1.000 dollar a day.
A millionaire would take roughly 3 years until he spent it all.
If Jesus were a billionaire and did the same. He wouldn’t finished by today and would need another 700 years.
The numbers might be not exact but the point still stands: The difference between a millionaire and billionaire is ridiculous huge.
Correct, because the difference between a millionaire and a billionaire is roughly 1 billion dollars.
People think they understand numbers like billion because they understand thousand and billion is just thousand times thousand (million) times thousand. Multiplication is fairly intuitive, but exponentiation is not. Without explicitly thinking it through people feel like 1000^3 is not very different from 1000 * 3.
It’s the same reason the lottery fools so many people into gambling their money away.
People know what a million euros is, and having that 1000x is not that weird to reason about
There are roughly just under 3000 people on earth with more than a billion dollars.
They have a combined net worth of over $16 Trillion
Say the almighty Cthulu/Allah/Zeus decided “yo fuck those assholes” and instantly redistributed that $16 trillion among all 8 billion+ people on earth equally
Everyone: Every man, woman and child would get just a bit shy of $2000.
Fun thought experiment
I think what you mean to say is capitalism is cancer. There are books written on the subject.
At this point it’s not violence, it’s self defence.
Financial obesity is an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.
Not a fan fat shaming that gets bundled in with that but basically. It’s the vice of greed, plain and simple.
Like imagine rolling up to a potluck and just buying the table, leaving naught but a bag of chips for the rest of the party. Even if you can afford it, it’s still a crime against your fellows.
What are you talking about? Billionaires are what’s saving this country! Everyone just needs to stop eating and be homeless. But also fuxk homeless people and you turn to drugs for comfort? Jail obviously. They’re totally fixing everything! /S
I am incensed by the use of the word “literally” here almost as much as I am incensed by the hyper rich denying the vast fraction of the human race basics rights and freedoms. Almost.
I think OP used literally correctly here. They are saying that one possible definition of the word cancer can include billionaires as an instance. That’s not the definition you’ll find in any dictionary, but those lag behind the true language as it evolves.
I think OP used literally correctly here.
Then you do not understand what the word “literally” literally means.
While several treatments would work for either, (such as carving up the offending subject with a knife, or sufficient application of chemical or radiative agents), billionaires are an economic problem, not a biologic one.
Then you do not understand what the word “literally” literally means.
Oooo, sick burn!! I don’t know if I’ll recover from that!
My point is that I believe OP was using the word “literally” to mean what it literally means, and not just using it for emphasis as it is so often used these days. They may still be wrong, but they did not misuse the word.
My point is that I believe OP was using the word “literally” to mean what it literally means,
You can only rationally make that argument if you are claiming that “society” is a biological organism, like an amoeba or a babboon, presumably evolved from other common ancestors of all life on earth. When you can tell me the scientific name of this organism, and what organs have been affected by tumors, we can start talking about the literality of the “cancer” OP referred to.
As the underlying logic was metaphorical, “literally” was used as figurative hyperbole, not literality.
You are refuting an argument that I did not make.
Edit to add: OP says cancer can be used literally to refer to billionaires, you say it cannot. One of you must be wrong, but neither is misusing the word “literally.”
You are refuting an argument that I did not make.
I am refuting the argument that would need to be made in order to support your position. I clearly specified that necessity in my refutation. “Cancer” and “billionaire” would have to be synonymous, not analogous, for “literally” to have been used correctly.
What type of cancer are billionaires? Carcinomas are cancers of epithelial tissue, but “society” does not have epithelial tissue. Sarcomas are cancers of musculoskeletal and connective tissues, but “society” does not have bones, muscles, tendons, ligaments, etc. Myelomas are cancers of the plasma cells in bone marrow, but again, “society” doesn’t have bones. Leukemias are cancers of the various blood cells, but society doesn’t have “blood”. Lymphomas are cancers of the lymphatic system, but society doesn’t have one of those either.
In fact, “society” does not have biological tissues or organs that could even become literally cancerous. (Members of society do, indeed, have these various organs and tissues, but no member of society has been diagnosed with a “Bezosma” or “Muskaemia”.)
“Billionaires are cancer” is a metaphor. “Billionaires are literally cancer” is simply a false statement, unless “literally” was used, incorrectly, as hyperbole.
“Billionaires are literally cancer” is simply a false statement, unless “literally” was used, incorrectly, as hyperbole.
That is my point. Literally can be used correctly in a statement that is not correct, and my reading of the original post is that was OP’s intention. They did not misuse the word “literally.”
I’m not debating the meaning of the word cancer.
