Yes, the ultra wealthy have different priorities to what I would call important. The yachts, deregulation, tacit (or not) support for torture, illegal wars, pollution, private jets, ostentatious displays of conspicuous and pointless wealth, etc, leave that in no doubt.

Were you trying to say that maybe all that destruction in the pursuit of insatiable greed could be 'good' somehow? Like Zorg's little speech [0] about the benefits of destruction (the broken window fallacy)?

0 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkFAcFtBD48

▲

alexashka 7 months ago | parent [-]

> It's astounding how people can have all the facts and teachers in the world, while dodging genuine understanding of everything most important.

You said they are dodging 'genuine understanding'.

I am saying you aren't the final word on what 'genuine understanding of everything most important' is.

In other words - you are using lots of words to say 'I want others to do more of the stuff I want them to do and less of the stuff they are doing because the stuff I want them to do is obviously good and the stuff they are doing is obviously less good'.

Thing is, almost everyone thinks this. Given that almost everyone already thinks this way and the world isn't what you want it to be, maybe something about such a worldview is off. Or maybe we just need more of people like you in positions of power and you'll fix it :) Where have I heard that one before?

▲

mandmandam 7 months ago | parent | next [-]

So anyone who uses the phrase "genuine understanding" is secretly a wannabe power-hungry authoritarian? Dunno about that one bud.

And anyone who calls out vapid conspicuous consumption, or the greedy exploitation of the planet for personal gain, that's not obviously perverse to you; it's just one person's opinion and easily disregarded - because they're not the final word on genuine understanding?

Well, pick your prophet; pick your genius; they all say the same thing:

"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."

- Jesus.

"By his craving for riches the foolish man slays himself, as if he were slaying others."

- Buddha

"The mutual rivalry for piling up of worldly things diverts you, until you visit the graves."

- The Qur'an

"He who is not contented with what he has, would not be contented with what he would like to have."

- Socrates

"It is not the man who has too little, but the man who craves more, that is poor."

- Seneca

"The more you have, the more you want. The more you have, the less you are."

- Tolstoy

"A calm and modest life brings more happiness than the pursuit of success combined with constant restlessness."

- Einstein

"Wealth is like seawater: the more you drink, the thirstier you become."

- Schopenhauer

"A small terrace by the mountain stream, living at ease, free from the burdens of the world — this is better than the glory of an emperor."

- Zhuangzi

Etc, etc, etc.

Some people, really, truly, have a genuine understanding of this concept. And many, probably most incredibly wealthy people, with every possible opportunity, can't grasp it for the life of them. That's not really "my opinion"; it's the opinion of anyone worth listening to.

▲

llm_trw 7 months ago | parent | next [-]

>And anyone who calls out vapid conspicuous consumption, or the greedy exploitation of the planet for personal gain, that's not obviously perverse to you; it's just one person's opinion and easily disregarded - because they're not the final word on genuine understanding?

Pretty much, yes.

Yesterdays vapid conspicuous consumption is tomorrows minimum living standard.

Three meals a day every day forever?

Even medieval kings had to go on a diet when famine struck.

▲

mandmandam 7 months ago | parent [-]

> Yesterdays vapid conspicuous consumption is tomorrows minimum living standard.

The way of life of our billionaires is threatening all life on the planet, particularly the poorest [0]. There might not be a living standard if we don't fix this issue.

0 - https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/billionaires-emit-mo...

▲

Jensson 7 months ago | parent [-]

It isn't the billionaires emitting that, it is all the factories they own that produce products for the middle class. If the middle class didn't consume those then they wouldn't have been made and the pollution wouldn't be there.

Billionaires emit a bit more, but not that much more.

Note the very disingeneous comment here:

> tracks the emissions from private jets, yachts and polluting investments

"Private jets" and "polluting investments" were in the same sentence as if they were in the same ballpark, but its the investments that count for almost everything and they would be polluting regardless if the billionaires owned them or not.

	▲	mandmandam 7 months ago \| parent [-]
		> Oxfam found that, on average, 50 of the world’s richest billionaires took 184 flights in a single year, spending 425 hours in the air —producing as much carbon as the average person would in 300 years. In the same period, their yachts emitted as much carbon as the average person would in 860 years. That's not "a bit more". That's insane. And there's absolutely nothing disingenuous about it, because the article clearly states: > the average investment emissions of 50 of the world’s richest billionaires are around 340 times their emissions from private jets and superyachts combined. > Through these investments, billionaires have huge influence over some of the world’s biggest corporations and are driving us over the edge of climate disaster. ... I don't know why this isn't convincing to you, but it's not Oxfam's fault.

▲

7 months ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]

▲

pixl97 7 months ago | parent | prev [-]

If course what you're saying can be taking to absurdity too. Take the paradox of intolerance, if we let the intolerant have power they will wipe out anyone they don't like, hence why we have laws against things like murder.