Cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/34117495
[OC]
Original still created by @gedogfx (IG). Title source: “Inkl”
Edit: I’m not on any other social media platforms, so feel free to share this elsewhere if you want
Reminds me of a black mirror episode. 15 million something.
Okay, we’re slowly getting into the questionable territory here.
This is nothing; you should see the one wear he rips open his cowl to reveal his shimmering sculpted physique
I don’t believe you…. Link?
Lol! I had to scroll down a single page to see it, and the slow reveal as I scrolled was amazing! 10/10 great art!
You have my intention.
Not since Cecilia Giménez, has the world known such craft.
I’m gonna throw up this is too real. AI has gone to far
Absolute masterpiece. This has a place in my gallery forever.
Good use of AI
Cool that the generationally rich guy who supported anti-woke messages and Elon Musk amongst other things is Lemmy’s new hero. Perhaps there’s some weird sort of hope in the air, that actions speak more than one’s bank account or family, and more than whatever the fuck one does in social media.
Yup. People who do good things are liked. You should try it sometime instead of being a miserable little man.
Whom should I murder? Are you free on friday?
If I was a monster who directly profited from people’s deaths then killing me would be justice, yes.
You will never do anything as brave as this young man who just threw away his entire life to send a message. Coward.
Yeah, it’s probable that I won’t. But what made you think I’m disparaging him?
has anyone asked you how your jimmys are doing recently?
If your jimmys are rustled or if you’ve been in direct contact with someone that have had their jimmys rustled, please seek help.
If you’re not sure if your jimmys are rustled the following symptoms may apply.
- poor hygiene
- being upset by things that don’t concern you
- water retention
- being upset by things you can’t hope to understand
- being upset by the size of your penis
- being upset that nobody cares about your opinion
- diarrhea (rectal and verbal)
- being upset after coming to the realization that your thoughts or ideas on a subject aren’t shared or don’t matter
- having or protecting opinions that are illogical or pointless
- sensitive nipples
- shrinking testicles
- relishing the taste of prolapsed anuses
- unsightly hair growth around the neck and back
Thanks for asking m8 now fuck off
oh yeah, mega rustled.
have you tried walking away and not caring as much?
You cannot choose your parents or your upbringing or your past. Only what you do in your present. And he chose to give up his future to do good in the now.
Hey, Americans, nothing stops your Democrat-run blue states from improving your healthcare.
“Nothing” you say?
Like, no Republicans…
I could be wrong, but it seems to me that decision-makers all over the planet are absolutely horrified at the idea of making any sweeping changes whatsover to health care system, whatever it is. Because they fear the very real possibility that they will cause masses of deaths due to complications during the transition and then that will be their legacy.
If we take at face value that there exists a change that one can just simply make to the healthcare system, and then it will all be better, there’s still going to be some kind of transition.
The healthcare doesn’t need to change. Just how it is funded.
massachusetts did it and it works great; not as good as single payer, sure, but better than the alternative.
Is this a reference to Romneycare or did they improve upon that?
that’s a bit of a misnomer since it was passed by the overwhelmingly democratic statehouse while romney fought it the entire time
Sorry, I italicized it now. Anyone who uses that name, uses it in jest. The funniest part was during the ACA thing and him acting clueless.
nothing stops your Democrat-run blue states from improving your healthcare.
Given the two party system, and the fact that republicans arent in power in these states, that only leaves the Democrats themselves.
End First Past The Post voting. Introduce competition into the electoral process. FREE voters ability to choose.
But I guess that isn’t profitable enough for some.
Nothing lasts forever…
These sound like commitments you guys should be asking of the Democrats.
It’s certainly harder to do on a state level. There is no inter-state border control. Doing single payer on a state level is likely to bring in the worst cases from at least neighboring states.
California might do it, but they have a few big advantages. First, their population is high enough that they can absorb a little cross state immigration without hitting the balance too hard. Second, the states near them tend to be more sparsely populated, unlike the east coast.
Basically you’re looking at only California and New York if you want to do it on a state level. And they’re both going to face huge lobbying against it.
If this is something you want to get done, it’s got to have a lot of public support. And if you’re able to gather that much public support, why not just do it federally? It works better that way anyway.
Cause the whole point is that we can’t do anything federally but can at the state level.
They’ve been asked. Request was denied.
Capital flight.
The right wing bogeyman. If it were that simple, California would be as broke as Alabama and Louisiana would be New York.
Yeah, Jersey is nicely blued, but beholden to big pharma, and I think messing with healthcare hits too close to home. Governor race is next year though and so hopefully this issue stays hot.
Why? UHC is cheaper than the current system. You wouldn’t need any extra taxes.
Really shows me how traumatized I am by United Health Care when I see UHC and it immediately brings them to mind and not Universal. I had to put in some work to understand that Acronym
It’s only cheaper if you consider current healthcare costs. It would require tax increases, and under current progressive tax models, those would be disproportionately high for the upper class, for whom the increase would not offset the elimination of their healthcare premium.
I don’t know how you can say with any confidence that the increase would not offset the elimination of their healthcare premium when the system literallydoesn’t exist.
I said under current progressive tax models.
And what would this non-existent healthcare system cost them to contribute to?
It depends on the state. Massachusetts actually does have a flat income tax, so maybe it would be easier to do there. But even so, wealthy people might prefer to buy private plans, and see the tax as redundant.
No, the sum of all premiums paid by all Americans is way more than is required. You could make it a flat tax and it’d still be cheaper.
The tax increase is more than offset by the cost of premiums.
That may be the case, but do you have any evidence or reasoning? There are a certain number of people right now who don’t have insurance or who have very bad insurance, and a universal insurance would have to have to make up what’s missing for those people.
There’s a variety of ways to implement it, but the vast majority save trillions in the long run. https://www.citizen.org/news/fact-check-medicare-for-all-would-save-the-u-s-trillions-public-option-would-leave-millions-uninsured-not-garner-savings/ has a couple sources listed, even a Koch-funded institute found it would save money.
The reasoning is simple: you cut out the middlemen who demand a portion of the premiums for themselves. Those costs are instantly removed, and there isn’t really anything that starts costing more in return.
There’s also collective governmental bargaining on procedures and medication which lowers prices.
I understand that it saves money overall. I don’t understand how it could save money for individual high-income tax payers. At some earning level, your taxes will be raised by more than you would pay for insurance. Even under a flat tax, that has to be the case, right? You would need a regressive tax to actually make it beneficial to every single resident.
Yeah we need to deflate the disproportionately high pricing of the health care caused by insurance as well, if we could get it at the national level we could eliminate a lot of the back office overhead, and then maybe negotiate a revisit of the master charge list so that Tylenol in hospital isn’t something crazy like $250 dollars a dose. State by state this would probably be much more difficult.
Out of California, New York, Massachusetts? Lol, yea right.
Maybe. It’s worth trying.
Me catching up on historical Christian theology on YouTube to help contextualize the spirituality of my youth:
I’m loving this lecturer’s depth of knowledge on this subject and he’s right that literally every person who knows that religion exists has some kind of theological standpoint whether or not they even believe in a God at all-
-but I completely disagree that the specific question of divinity is worth even asking let alone debating or worst case scenario creating divisions between people over. This isn’t even me saying I believe in it or not in fact I specifically refuse to engage with that question in any way.
Debates regarding the divinity of Jesus have been overwhelmingly used throughout history to provide cover for ideologies that both directly contradict the actual words of Jesus and which have caused the suffering and death of millions. “It’s fine that we rape children because we believe in the divinity of Jesus!” The nicene creed ruined one of if not the greatest antiestablishment movements in history and was instrumental in its transformation into itself being the abusive establishment.
Now, I do understand that this makes me by default non-nicene, but it’s the fact that that binary exists in the first place that I specifically object to. They’re the ones making it an issue for no reason other than to have something to hold over other people’s heads that requires no actual thought or effort. They don’t have to actually debate theology, they’ve ended the discussion there by choosing a fundamentally unprovable premise to hinge their entire argument on. They’ve absolved themselves of expending any effort to better the world because by saying one passage out loud their labor is complete.
The nicene creed exists for no other reason than to wage ideological and literal wars over so that real good can be ignored or even fought against. It does not improve the world in any way. The nicene creed ruined Christianity.
Thank you for coming to my TEDTalk.
You sound like you need Satan in your life.
The satanic temple recognizes that religion has a huge sphere of influence over humanity, and this sphere should not be conceded to theist religions alone. The satanic temple serves as a counter balance to theist religions, and their influence in the world.
PS: Here is a joke:
Question: What to do call people who believe that Satan exists?
Answer:
Christians
Nah diehard atheism isn’t really my jam. I’m leaning more towards gnosticism / esotericism. I’m actually fine with the whole Jesus thing I just wanna skip the misogyny and do more chasing capitalists out of churches with whips while getting drunk with hookers. Also I’m actually kinda vibing with the aesthetic of the weird pseudoscientific spiritual shit because I like my placebos to have pretty rocks and starry shit and as an added side bonus it makes mansplainers really irrationally angry and that’s just funny asf. Also technically Christians and Satanists both believe in satanism the same way if you follow the original vein of satan just being the absence of god its just satanists think that’s a good thing and / or the truer nature of the world which is valid they’re just really edgy / pretentious about it and I’m not ready to buy a trilby just yet. I do admire their work in regards to abortion and reclaiming public and civic spaces from religious oppression. I guess that’s the issue though; Satanism is a political stance, I’m more looking for a spiritual philosophy and religious rituals that connect me to a wider community and provide patterns for my mind and body to latch onto for stability and comfort. Satanism doesn’t provide any of that which again, is fine, but not what I’m looking for.
I find the debate on the nicene creed fascinating as always, including your take. But where the fuck are you getting “raping kids is ok because we believe in the divinity of Jesus” [sic]?
What lecturer are you referring to, have a link?
Bruce Gore, specifically on church history. Seems to be a Presbyterian which imo are usually the biggest nerds but that was what I was looking for anyway ;)
I can’t help but to agree with you on more or less all points made.
I made the same journey during COVID, ultimately arriving at a similar place that the Nicene Creed was the first in a long line of obvious retconned political and human decisions. For what is worth, I also feel like it’s in the same vein as most of what Paul did, codifying and standardizing to the detriment of the source material and to the benefit of anyone willing to take charge.
I’m still genuinely shocked that anyone can read the Gospels and then not see the record-scratch pivot in tone for everything else afterwards. Well, shocked in as far as to then be disappointed at how easily a mess of addenda created something antithetical to a bunch of nebulous good vibes with no clear avenue to monetize it all.
Which, oddly enough, Buddhism does as well, but owns it as part of the process.
wow :D if that sun didn’t move it would be flawless.
in this type of artwork, that depicts a halo, not the sun. The AI actually got that right
Amen
Very ironic imho to use AI to celebrate this guy.
Why?
Anti-AI is a small primitivism and/or IP protection movement.
It has nothing to do with the working class struggle. Or the right to have proper healthcare.
It’s incredible how successfully the AI topic has been hijacked by copyright propaganda.
Copyright is bad, period. Barking at AI for using copyrighted shit for training just makes it less accessible to train for anyone BUT the mega rich.
Let’s say we do ban copyright data for training. Then only Google, Microsoft and Apple can releastically source data for training. That and countries that don’t respect this like China and Iran right? Ok, so now they hired farms of people to produce training material and release their models that NOBODY can compete with. Everything is literally worse in every possible way now and AI is fully owned by corporate overlords.
I genuinely don’t understand the though process of these people. We want information to be free and accessible to everyone, no?
IMO it should be illegal to monetize things made by AI trained on copyrighted material unless you also make the model open source and freely available for download. That doesn’t stifle innovation.
I think that’s a fair take though the world is allergic to “open source” being a part of our government. I mean, we can’t even open source government projects paid by citizens in most countries so introducing open source as part of our governing process is basically impossible.
United Healthcare was using AI to deny claims.
Also saying AI has nothing to do with the working class struggle is hilarious.
This is such a stretch. AI used to deny claims and video animation AI are so far apart that you might as well be complaining that both of these two things are using the same electrons 🙄
Well, I disagree. They may be trained on different data sets but both represent the same ethical problems with generative AI right now, imho.
Clearly you don’t even know what AI means and just parrot whatever meme you hear. What ethical issues? You’re comparing copyright theft to what? Using machine learning to decide whether insurance claim should be accepted? These aren’t even the same realm of computing and as close as a calculator is to Candy Crush.
So, you don’t think there’s ethical issues with letting machine learning who lives and dies? When did I say they were the exact same technology? Do not assume what I do and do not know based on things I did not say, my friend.
Nah dude you said it’s the same ethical issue when it’s clearly not. Machine deciding whether who lives or dies vs what exactly? What’s the other issue that is the same “ethical issue” here with image generating AI? Which part is the same or even remotely similar?
Maybe you mean that both technologies are problematic? But that’s really not all that useful because ALL technology is problematic by the very nature of it being a force of change.
Probably also using computers. And I’ve heard that CEO drink water too.
Primitivism are actually working against the interest of the working class. Without technology the workers are the ones who will need to work for more hours to obtain the same level of life quality.
I don’t have a problem with the concept of generative AI my guy. What you call “primitivism” I call having an ethical issue with basically everything surrounding how it’s done right now. Also, I am a creative person so I do actually believe in IP.
what do you see as the difference between a person seeing your work, Ingesting it into their brain to reprogram their brain, allowing them to make parallel works, and an AI ingesting your work as part of its training data?
Our current IP laws prohibit making money on exact copies of your work. That is not what AI does.
We live in a capitalist word. Almost every use of every technology is unethical.
But people hold a special grudge against AI.
Same example as before. Is United Healthcare use AI for denying treatment it got pointed out. If they used a Java app and traditional algorithms to do so, it’s not the technology which we point out, don’t we?
If AI is forced in windows 11 by Microsoft, it’s pointed out. But if they force Teams, we don’t hate communication applications, don’t we? We don’t say that communication applications are bad and unethical. Even if most of them are as property of big tech as AI is.
Now the question is, why AI is getting this special treatment?
In order to get the answer I traces where the hated started. There was AI before. And the first by jump in generative AI was not hated, quite the contrary it got plenty of praise. But then Image generation came… And it rubbed artist the wrong way, thus the anti-AI movement started.
Also I looked for other correlations with people against AI. And I found that they tend to be against any new technology from the last 5-10 years or so.
So that’s how I found the answer of that question. Just looking at the origins and looking at who had those opinions.
I have found that the genesis of most things is the key to really understand them. And this genesis really explains why if an AI takes workers jobs it’s hated and pointed out, but if a python script does the same it’s not.
I’m an open minded person. If I get a better answer to that question that bugs me, I would reconsider my position. But I’m yet to read any rational answer on:
Why AI gets a special treatment when judging its unethical uses when compared with any other technology also being unethically used by corporations and capitalism?
You are correct, AI is getting a lot of flack for unethical behavior, when unethical behavior is inherent to the neo capitalist mindset.
And primitivism is obviously on the rise too, which is represented by the rise in individualism, nationalism, fascism worldwide.
You’ve got a particular worldview that I’m not interested in engaging with. Happy holidays.
Fair enough. Have good holidays!
If you think it has nothing to do with the working class struggle you need to go back to square one and begin again. There isn’t much that isn’t impacted by the rise of AI.
I wont take lessons of primitivists, sorry.
People against technological advancements are against the progress of the working class.
The only chance for people to live good is to delegate a great amount of work to the machines. That’s just it.
If you think that primitivism is the answer and got fooled by the anti-AI movement you should be going back to square one. Start reading the basics until you learn thar technological progress is not the problem, human greediness and capitalism is.
You’re tilting at windmills. It’s not about rejecting technological advancement. It’s about ensuring its fairness and accessability.
Yes, technology can be (and is) used for social good. It can also be (and is) used to opress and supress. What’s more both dynamics are happening at the same time. The world isn’t black-and-white. The human condition is complex.
That’s exactly my point.
AI is just another technology. If some corporation does bad things with it is just bad. If some people do good things with it then is good.
But people charge at AI just because itself. They are against the technology. Not the corporations using it.
I have been given the example “But UH is using AI to deny medical treatment”. What if instead of AI they would have used a Java application? They would be against Java? No, because that argument is not rational.
They are just against AI because etsy artists who made easy money doing porn commission got their hustle broken by AI doing a better job for free. That’s just how the anti-AI movement somehow got mixed in some leftist circles, because etsy artists are too influential in those circles. And their complain got blown out of proportions.
No one is really talking about AI as inherently bad. It’s current implementation is impossible to separate from consolidated ownership by big tech and environmental rape in the name of delivering a technology that has no clear use case to the end consumer yet.
Just because people don’t want unpack all of that nuance for pedants like you doesn’t mean it isn’t there.
Until AI means something different than the transgressive genAI integration and resource hoarding of big Tech - indeed until AI is no longer synonymous with Big Tech, then all of this wretched handwringing you’re engaging in over the distinction between the two will continue to be useless, meaningless, and fucking annoying.
Spend your time on something useful. Would you like a new prompt?
They actually are though.
Environmental rape. Fun meaningless term, when having Photoshop open for hours is more environmentally damaging that creating the equivalent with Stable Diffusion.
You cannot unpack any nuance because you are intellectually incapable of doing so. As you only seem to follow the latest trend for your favourite influencer, without actually making any real analysis of what you are saying or writing. The “funny meaningless terminology” you used is more than enough indicator to me that behind those words there are not any thoughts.
I’m not big tech and I use AI, in a computer with a top 40W consumption. So try again cave boy. Try tell me how I’m “raping” earth with that use of AI.
Sorry for all the names thrown in this post, but you got it coming.
Seems like you’re prescribing a lot of opinions to the people you’re replying to. But if you go back and read what they wrote carefully you should see that your deductions and assumptions about what they think don’t really stand the test of reason and semantics. Especially given how much of a tech-focused forum this is. Every third post is about Linux - so realistically what are the chances that you are enaging with primitivists on here?
Linux is not a “scary new technology”. It has been around forever.
Try to look for a positive view on any technology that has been blooming in the last 5-10 years instead. You’ll find few. At least I find few.
For instance, self driving cars are also hated. Digital currency instead of cash (not talking about cryptocurrency, just things like digital euro, or digital yuan). Any form of digitalization of anything that wasn’t digital until the last 5 years seems to be hated.
Welp, even smartphones seems to be hated. The other day I stumbled into a post where a lot of people said that they preferred old fliphones and where considering getting one instead of a smartphone.
Technobros used as derogatory term. Hell, even Luigi was being called out here for being a “technobro”.
Primitivism is on the rise. I wish it wasn’t, but it is.
People against technological advancements are against the progress of the working class.
If you think that what is being called “AI” right now is actually a useful tool for the working class when big corpo dumbasses are selling it as a replacement for workers: You’re fucking delusional.
Ah. Here we are. The Schrodinger AI.
People are now behaving like MAGA with the immigrants. At the same same time too bad to do anything useful and also stealing everyone’s jobs.
Not surprised that two identical ways of thinking end up with the same arguments.
At the end, irrational thinkers are all just the same.
Except anyone with a fucking brain who has been paying attention can see that actually happening with AI. It’s utter garbage that barely works, and it has been used to replace actual people or other tools that do work.
This isn’t about being against the advancement of technology. The technology itself fucking sucks. We can do better.
Anyone with a brain know that anti-AI movement started because etsy artists doing porn commissions for a living got replaced, because AI can do a better job on that for free.
And because those etsy artists are incredibly influential in some circles the anti-AI feeling got blown out of proportions.
But making wanna-be entrepreneurs the backbone of the workers movement is not moving the working class anywhere.
The places where I have used the technology works just fine if you know how to use it. For programming it’s incredibly more efficient that going search to stack overflow or github. And to do refractors of your code it can save a lot of time.
In my spare time I also use AI for image recognition as part of a self-hosted security system. And works far better that any other solution.
I can actively choose to use the technology or no. I choose to use it because it makes my job easier. Simple as that.
He’s my hero. Please more people follow in his footsteps. Praise be to Luigi
down with AI trash
I looks really good, though.
Just another butthurt “artist” looking for something to blame for their lack of creativity and latent talent.
I’m no artist, but well done for just taking a guess and posting.
I posted what I posted because AI slop makes my skin crawl.
In my experience, the people who are the most excited about AI are the people who are doing poorly at being a person, specifically people who have trouble interacting with other people.
You’re using the term “butthurt” without a shred of irony in 2024, so I don’t know, man. Forget what I’m saying, go out there an prompt them LLM’s.
I can’t find the words to properly express how much I love this.
This animation is incredible. The best AI generated animation I think I’ve seen. The only weird thing I can detect is the excessive flopping of his sleeve. But to make up for it is the way his index finger is slightly bent because you can’t tuck the rest of your fingers all the way in without doing so. Crazy stuff.
His crows feet looked odd.
How about his addams apple (throat lozenge) shifting all the way to the side?
Oh good catch! That’s a bit wonky. Through his shoulders do turn that way so I can kinda see what the AI was “thinking”.
Nice observation
Now imagine what the big guys have available to em
Someone should mail this to a few CEOs lmao
Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God
Matthew 19:24
“Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming on you. Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days. Look! The wages you failed to pay the workers who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter. You have condemned and murdered the innocent one, who was not opposing you.”
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James+5%3A1-6&version=NIV
I like to contextualize this in a modern form. I like to say, “there are no billionaires in Heaven. In the end, every last one of them burns.” When I see Musk, Bezos, or Trump, I see men who are literally and inevitably headed for the very literal fires of Hell. Let them have their vanity here. In the end, they’re all gonna fry.
I don’t know what qualifies as “rich.” But I don’t think a modest 401k to support yourself in retirement is going to damn anyone. I don’t know where the line is, but by the time you get the obscene level of a billionaire, you have been consumed by greed.
I like to imagine wealth and as an anchor. Would you die, your soul tries to ascend upward. But those with great wealth find themselves chained to a great golden weight, a spiritual manifestation of their wealth and greed on Earth. And as they try to fly upward, they instead are pulled down, down, and down. They see the surface of the Earth rise up above them like a diver descending beneath the ocean’s surface. And they do not stop falling until they reach the Pit.
The context for the original quote is Jesus speaking to a “young ruler”. The young ruler asks if he will be judged as a good person. He follows all the religious laws and is very pious. Jesus tells him to sell his possessions and give the money to the poor. Jesus promises the man that his reward will be great in heaven, but the young ruler cannot bring himself to do it.
I don’t see this as Jesus telling everyone to live in poverty. This is Jesus testing the man’s faith. Even though Jesus himself promises the man a reward for giving up his possessions, he doesn’t trust Jesus. He doesn’t have faith that his actions will be rewarded in heaven. The warning isn’t that having possessions is inherently evil, but that one can be so tied to their Earthly possessions they can refuse a direct request by Jesus himself.
I like to view it in the context of the passage about the three people donating money. One wealthy man donates a large sum of money, while a man who makes an average living donates a smaller amount, and the last is an old lady who donates something akin to $1.50. In the end, Jesus declares that the old lady gave the most because she donated all that she feasibly could while the wealthy man gave what was a mere pittance of his money and the other man gave a noticeable portion of his salary, but not enough that he would miss it.
The effort and generosity behind a donation (whether of time or money) is more important than the donation itself, and that’s what the rich can’t understand. By the time you get to that level of wealth, you’ve spent so much energy in accruing wealth that you no longer have the empathy to see those around you who truly need aid, and to lose that empathy is to lose an essential part of what makes us human - a part of the divinity that exists within us.
If you’re on lemmy, you’re probably rich. Like worldwide rich.
The discrepancy you’re pointing out across different countries is at most 18x, according to your article.
Let’s ignore, for a second, that “richness” needs to be considered in the context of COL. Yes, 1% of someone salary could make an impact in Tajikistan. But the cost of a meal for that potential donor could also bankrupt someone in Tajikistan. But let’s ignore that for now.
18x an average persons salary is a fart in the wind when it comes to the rich. Take a look.
comfortably rich in [pick whatever capital city you want] is a grain of sand compared to being a billionaire though, that is the level of disparity we are talking about
I understand that. the Bible makes no such exceptions and probably couldn’t imagine what we have now. we should help who we can. we live better than any king in the Bible. I know about the disparity that exists now. my only point is that everyone here on lemmy is likely above the world median but acts like they are paupers because they compare themselves to celebrities. I hear Oxfam does good work if you don’t want to work locally. I’m down with eat the rich, just please don’t mistake yourself for poor if you’re not. if there wasn’t an ocean between the usa and Africa we would probably look at wealth differently. but all that said, of course the wealth graph shouldn’t look exponentially increasing, but for a biblical discussion I think you can ignore the top 5% as a historical anomaly ignoring the usury.
Oh fuck off. This is the same mentality of pushing the climate crisis off onto everybody instead of the few people causing it.
I mean it’s true. Nothing you ever do will matter.
Edit: Outside of luigiing, but that probably can’t work twice. And it probably does matter much either. I think the point is that it’s not what you can accomplish, which being rich in your eyes seems to make you more responsible for (you could feed a starving kid for 53 cents a day, but likely don’t ), but how you conduct yourself.
Anyway I do find it a little hypocritical that people here on lemmy complain about the rich when they have probably never missed a meal. Yeah, there are people that could feed most of the world, but I’m not addressing them.
To give you some context on at least one downvote.
I have been homeless like proper homeless sleeping on a metal chair with a backpack outside my college for weeks using the gym to shower and working 3 jobs to afford the basic idea of the American dream of going to college and nothing else. I spent most of my childhood hungry as my incubator spent all money on her vices.
I ended up fleeing the country via a work program that basically made me an indentured servant for a few years while I tried to get my life together in a way where I didn’t want it to end anymore.
You speak for a lot of people you don’t know when you say sweeping statements about the audience to who you are talking to.
But also with that said I bet most of the down votes are still people who have not lived a life nearly that rough and think that renting is an equal level of poor and don’t want to hear it.
No it’s not. Some dude is quoting the Bible. So no basis in reality. The quote generally talks about giving all your stuff to the poor and being a boon to humanity instead of keeping things for yourself, but I point out that people here have more than most in this world and I’m wrong?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_per_adult
I quoted the Bible because the image in the OP is Luigi in the style of a saint. I’m not religious.
If I said “the Sun is hot” and you said “if you live on Earth you experience temperatures hotter than most of the universe” you also wouldn’t be wrong. You’d be Neil deGrasse Tyson. Most of the universe is -270°C. Earth is 15°C. The sun is 1,000,000°C. No matter how you look at it, the Sun is hot. The Earth is only hot if you purposefully compare it to cold things.
1/3 of the world make $2 a day. I made about $137 a day. Thompson made $27,945 a day. I am $135/d away from the poorest and $27,808/d away from Thompson. I’m not sure what the goal is of saying I am rich compared to the poor when I am 205x closer to being the world’s poorest than I am to being a multi-millionare, let alone one of the approx. 2,700 billionaires in the world.
my goal isn’t about ignoring the super rich. it was more about spending one day, Xmas day, thinking more about the poor.
Don’t use them as props in your arguments then and speak about them with compassion and how to raise them up then.
