e$tGyr#J2pqM8v

terrorism vs resistance fighter.

HTS are terrorist, hamas are terrorists, everyone’s a terrorist if you’re on the losing side. Then when you win everyone suddenly needs to make a swift but uncomfortable change, like with HTS, to acknowledge you, without saying anything like ’ maybe we were wrong all along?'. No no, of course we were right, just the situation changed. right…

You’ve gone from being perceived as an inspiring intelligent neurodiverse outsider, to an evil good for nothing oligarch. Can you imagine what the impact would be if you would announce tomorrow, that you would give all or most of your shares to the employees that work for your companies, and you would state to the world that having (hecto)billionaires is dangerous and immoral, and that being one you experienced first hand that it is psychologically harmful, that you lost sense of who you were, but now want to return to your innocence.

Yes I think you’re right. Culture and upbringing are very important factors. What remains is that the potential of human empathy is incredible. I don’t think empathy needs a reward per se, I think the positive feeling you describe is enough reward, again it’s not to be underestimated. I am personally volunteering one day per week at my local homeless shelter, while I work a paid job 4 days per week at a mental hospital as a nurse. I don’t want to be paid for the homeless shelter, I am fine with doing it voluntarily, I specifically wanted to do something voluntarily just to proof to myself that I don’t maximize my income, to be sure I don’t play the money game. But your point about how it is not only unrewarding financially but the reverse: it can even be a detriment to success, that’s very true. Before my nursing school I got a degree in marketing & management (which made me incredibly unhappy). I’m very glad I chose to go do something else, because I feel like my contribution to society is far bigger now than it ever could have been as a marketeer. Despite that I would’ve made a lot more money as a marketeer. Free market capitalism is amoral when it comes what to contributing to society the market, if your job is to sell addicting products to people, that destroy their lives, but it makes you a decent profit, then you’ll be rewarded for it. Far more so than most essential workers would ever earn. That combined with money not being just money (power), but also status: we celebrate wealth. Wealthy equals good. We don’t look at how one earned his wealth, we just look at the wealth and are in awe. Obviously we are giving people the wrong incentives.

I think we shouldn’t underestimate human empathy. The problem is just that we build structures to avoid it. Rich people choose to not see poor people too much or they would feel empathy and be inclined to help them. If the poor are far away, merely an abstraction that is said to exist, then their existence is not felt strongly enough to trigger an empathy response. Surely there are exceptions to some degree, but I think humans are very empathetic and that’s one of our great powers.

not so much if we’d legalize drugs.

Didn’t he shoot while the man was fleeing? I can understand though that it must have been a stressful situation for the kid, so I could forgive him for his actions. But I wouldn’t say it’s right to shoot a man that’s fleeing.

“Gaither says he followed the man outside and started shooting as the intruder fled with a clothes hamper.” https://globalnews.ca/news/2675426/he-started-crying-like-a-little-baby-11-year-old-shoots-suspected-home-invader/

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

Looks like an eierbal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankie

Can someone inform me about what’s wrong with lemmy.ml?

And don’t forget that here in Europe we have a lot more vacation days too!

I thought they didn’t target children with their ads. Did I imagine that or is a barbie a product aimed at adults in Germany?

Any one got other FOSS game tips?

You don’t need tariffs, you need taxes. The problem isn’t that your economy isn’t doing well, it’s that too much of the wealth goes to the top and too little to lower and middle class. It’s not normal that one man has more than 250 billion.

As a psychiatric nurse, during my work day I watch my screen for about 1 out of 8 hours. When I come home I like to spend some time behind the screen. I sometimes wonder if it is necessary that so many people work behind screens. Shouldn’t we get more people to work as nurses, teachers but also craftsman, handyman, etc. This may sound as a naive and romantic thought, and I’m sure a lot of the work behind screens is extremely useful and efficient. But still I wonder if we haven’t somehow lost focus of what’s important. Like we’ve started to think that we can solve everything behind the computer, while simultaneously things are falling apart, people are lonely and people in need don’t get help.

But a fair point nonetheless.

This article is from 2015. By then it’s been 10 years since the company started, and he already left it. In the article he explains that still only 25% of the cacao used in Tony’s Chocolonely is guaranteed slave-free, let alone that they’ve had any significant impact on the industry at large. He says the situation of slave labor in cacao industry has only worsened. Tony’s has changed the message on their product “100% slave free” (which was false advertising) to something like “working together towards slave-free chocolate”, which he concludes to be meaningless marketing. It’s rather bizarre that such a message is allowed on a product that contains cacao from slave-labor…

Some info, that’s interesting and helps balance this blatant advertisement. Tony’s was started by Dutch television maker Teun van der Keuken. He worked on a program that exposes products for their production methods and false marketing and so on. They stumbled onto the slavery that’s part of the cacao industry. He asked to be arrested for eating chocolate, and in doing so enabling slave labor, but he wasn’t. He started out Tony’s Chocolonely to attempt to change the chocolate industry. He’s not part of the company anymore. He has concluded the mission has failed, and is very critical of his former company, saying they’ve lost sight of the aim: slave-free chocolate.

If you have a lot of money

• you contributed a lot to society
• you took a lot from society

If you’re a successful businessman and you want to contribute, perhaps you could lower the prices of your products, perhaps you could give shares to your employees who do all the work. Not only is it efficient for them to have a stake in the company, it’s also only fair. Not doing so is unfair. We won’t celebrate your ‘success’, a successful thief is a thief nonetheless. You doing so-called ‘philanthropy’ won’t do any good either. Money is power, you exerting your power over us isn’t the moral thing to do. It’s still wrong to the core. Sure, people voluntarily giving money to all sorts of causes is a beautiful thing, but only if money is reasonably distributed among people in the first place. If you take money from society on a large scale and then exert this power, than undoubtedly your views and interests are disproportionately represented. Your intentions are dubious, because if you intended well, why did you keep all the money and power for yourself in the first place? It’s likely that you’re a power hungry maniac. But even if you’re somehow naively unaware of this and truly have the noblest of intentions with your philanthropy, then it’s still a ludicrous idea that this would be an efficient way to distribute money. It’s quite obvious that if everyone got a say in where the money goes, that the distribution of assets would better represent what society deems important. It’s only logical that if you get to distribute the money, it will go to things you deem important. If you think that makes sense, it can only mean that you deem yourself wiser, more moral, than all of humanity combined. It means you are a narcissist. It’s not unlikely that you are, people who are successful money-wise, often think that life it a money-game and they’re the winning players. And they have won because they work hard and are clever. The thing is, life isn’t a money-game, people have moral compasses and strive towards others goals than making money. And even if it was a money-game, you’ve not won because you’re so smart and hard-working, it is in a very large part due to your luck. That’s not an allegation, it’s a logical fact. People don’t have the same starting positions. Being a billionaire is morally wrong, even if you give all of it away later in life.