Datasets:

---

innovation-hacking2

/

shitposting_dataset3

like 0

[ "Republicans don't want a strong America. Republicans don't believe in America. Republicans don't believe in defending freedom. Republicans are weak on national defense.\netc.", ">\n\nThis is where the party is truly split. There are are still old school Republican hawks that would spend lavishly on defense. Then their is another group, let’s call them Russian assets, whose job is to weaken NATO and alienate American Allies under the guise of fiscal responsibility.", ">\n\nBingo", ">\n\n...targeted defense cuts in US support for Ukraine. Anything to help Putin.", ">\n\nOh, the libs will be so owned when the defense budget goes down. How will we ever afford our woke tanks? /s", ">\n\nThere have been many things you voted in favor of or against that I find difficult to understand. The voting rights bill is one. Every American should have easy access to voting.", ">\n\nThey want to Defund the military. They are so soft on national defense.", ">\n\nI am going to need a new supply of popcorn for this and the myriad of other self owning the GOP has hoisted upon itself." ]

[ "Republicans don't want a strong America. Republicans don't believe in America. Republicans don't believe in defending freedom. Republicans are weak on national defense.\netc.", ">\n\nThis is where the party is truly split. There are are still old school Republican hawks that would spend lavishly on defense. Then their is another group, let’s call them Russian assets, whose job is to weaken NATO and alienate American Allies under the guise of fiscal responsibility.", ">\n\nBingo", ">\n\n...targeted defense cuts in US support for Ukraine. Anything to help Putin.", ">\n\nOh, the libs will be so owned when the defense budget goes down. How will we ever afford our woke tanks? /s", ">\n\nThere have been many things you voted in favor of or against that I find difficult to understand. The voting rights bill is one. Every American should have easy access to voting.", ">\n\nThey want to Defund the military. They are so soft on national defense.", ">\n\nI am going to need a new supply of popcorn for this and the myriad of other self owning the GOP has hoisted upon itself.", ">\n\nThe GOP played itself it seems.\n\nLess than two weeks after cementing another major increase to the Pentagon budget, lawmakers are now talking about going the opposite direction — and are even raising the specter of across-the-board cuts that rocked the establishment just over a decade ago.\nAn emerging deal between Speaker Kevin McCarthy and conservatives who initially opposed his bid for the gavel looks to exact deep spending cuts. This comes amid a looming partisan fight over the debt limit, compounding fears that overall spending is poised for a return to automatic reductions known as sequestration.\n\n....\n\nTexas Republican Tony Gonzales plans to oppose the rules package in part because of his concerns about national security spending.\n“This has a proposed billions of dollar cut to defense, which I think is a horrible idea when you have [an] aggressive Russia in Ukraine, you have a growing threat of China in the Pacific,” Gonzales said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “How am I going to look at our allies in the eye and say, ‘I need you to increase your defense budget,’ but yet America is going to decrease ours?”\nDefense hawks are eyeing another real increase this year of up to 5 percent to meet threats posed by Russia and China and to mitigate high inflation. And supporters of increased defense spending are now warning up front that they outnumber the budget hardliners in the GOP conference.\n\n....\n\n\"[D]uring negotiations, cuts to defense were NEVER DISCUSSED,” Roy’s office wrote on Twitter. “In fact, there was broad agreement spending cuts should focus on NON-DEFENSE discretionary spending. This means cutting funding for the woke & weaponized bureaucrats that received massive increases under the $1.7 trillion omnibus.”\n\nArticle continues...." ]

[ "Republicans don't want a strong America. Republicans don't believe in America. Republicans don't believe in defending freedom. Republicans are weak on national defense.\netc.", ">\n\nThis is where the party is truly split. There are are still old school Republican hawks that would spend lavishly on defense. Then their is another group, let’s call them Russian assets, whose job is to weaken NATO and alienate American Allies under the guise of fiscal responsibility.", ">\n\nBingo", ">\n\n...targeted defense cuts in US support for Ukraine. Anything to help Putin.", ">\n\nOh, the libs will be so owned when the defense budget goes down. How will we ever afford our woke tanks? /s", ">\n\nThere have been many things you voted in favor of or against that I find difficult to understand. The voting rights bill is one. Every American should have easy access to voting.", ">\n\nThey want to Defund the military. They are so soft on national defense.", ">\n\nI am going to need a new supply of popcorn for this and the myriad of other self owning the GOP has hoisted upon itself.", ">\n\nThe GOP played itself it seems.\n\nLess than two weeks after cementing another major increase to the Pentagon budget, lawmakers are now talking about going the opposite direction — and are even raising the specter of across-the-board cuts that rocked the establishment just over a decade ago.\nAn emerging deal between Speaker Kevin McCarthy and conservatives who initially opposed his bid for the gavel looks to exact deep spending cuts. This comes amid a looming partisan fight over the debt limit, compounding fears that overall spending is poised for a return to automatic reductions known as sequestration.\n\n....\n\nTexas Republican Tony Gonzales plans to oppose the rules package in part because of his concerns about national security spending.\n“This has a proposed billions of dollar cut to defense, which I think is a horrible idea when you have [an] aggressive Russia in Ukraine, you have a growing threat of China in the Pacific,” Gonzales said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “How am I going to look at our allies in the eye and say, ‘I need you to increase your defense budget,’ but yet America is going to decrease ours?”\nDefense hawks are eyeing another real increase this year of up to 5 percent to meet threats posed by Russia and China and to mitigate high inflation. And supporters of increased defense spending are now warning up front that they outnumber the budget hardliners in the GOP conference.\n\n....\n\n\"[D]uring negotiations, cuts to defense were NEVER DISCUSSED,” Roy’s office wrote on Twitter. “In fact, there was broad agreement spending cuts should focus on NON-DEFENSE discretionary spending. This means cutting funding for the woke & weaponized bureaucrats that received massive increases under the $1.7 trillion omnibus.”\n\nArticle continues....", ">\n\nOur defense budget is bloated, not because of “work policies,” but due to defense contractors buying off congress. We also spend more on our military than the next 15 or so countries combined. I would support a 10-20% cut to the defense budget if the money saved could go towards social programs, such as free college or paid family leave." ]

[ "Republicans don't want a strong America. Republicans don't believe in America. Republicans don't believe in defending freedom. Republicans are weak on national defense.\netc.", ">\n\nThis is where the party is truly split. There are are still old school Republican hawks that would spend lavishly on defense. Then their is another group, let’s call them Russian assets, whose job is to weaken NATO and alienate American Allies under the guise of fiscal responsibility.", ">\n\nBingo", ">\n\n...targeted defense cuts in US support for Ukraine. Anything to help Putin.", ">\n\nOh, the libs will be so owned when the defense budget goes down. How will we ever afford our woke tanks? /s", ">\n\nThere have been many things you voted in favor of or against that I find difficult to understand. The voting rights bill is one. Every American should have easy access to voting.", ">\n\nThey want to Defund the military. They are so soft on national defense.", ">\n\nI am going to need a new supply of popcorn for this and the myriad of other self owning the GOP has hoisted upon itself.", ">\n\nThe GOP played itself it seems.\n\nLess than two weeks after cementing another major increase to the Pentagon budget, lawmakers are now talking about going the opposite direction — and are even raising the specter of across-the-board cuts that rocked the establishment just over a decade ago.\nAn emerging deal between Speaker Kevin McCarthy and conservatives who initially opposed his bid for the gavel looks to exact deep spending cuts. This comes amid a looming partisan fight over the debt limit, compounding fears that overall spending is poised for a return to automatic reductions known as sequestration.\n\n....\n\nTexas Republican Tony Gonzales plans to oppose the rules package in part because of his concerns about national security spending.\n“This has a proposed billions of dollar cut to defense, which I think is a horrible idea when you have [an] aggressive Russia in Ukraine, you have a growing threat of China in the Pacific,” Gonzales said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “How am I going to look at our allies in the eye and say, ‘I need you to increase your defense budget,’ but yet America is going to decrease ours?”\nDefense hawks are eyeing another real increase this year of up to 5 percent to meet threats posed by Russia and China and to mitigate high inflation. And supporters of increased defense spending are now warning up front that they outnumber the budget hardliners in the GOP conference.\n\n....\n\n\"[D]uring negotiations, cuts to defense were NEVER DISCUSSED,” Roy’s office wrote on Twitter. “In fact, there was broad agreement spending cuts should focus on NON-DEFENSE discretionary spending. This means cutting funding for the woke & weaponized bureaucrats that received massive increases under the $1.7 trillion omnibus.”\n\nArticle continues....", ">\n\nOur defense budget is bloated, not because of “work policies,” but due to defense contractors buying off congress. We also spend more on our military than the next 15 or so countries combined. I would support a 10-20% cut to the defense budget if the money saved could go towards social programs, such as free college or paid family leave.", ">\n\nYa. That’s not where it’s going. Those will also be cut." ]

[ "Republicans don't want a strong America. Republicans don't believe in America. Republicans don't believe in defending freedom. Republicans are weak on national defense.\netc.", ">\n\nThis is where the party is truly split. There are are still old school Republican hawks that would spend lavishly on defense. Then their is another group, let’s call them Russian assets, whose job is to weaken NATO and alienate American Allies under the guise of fiscal responsibility.", ">\n\nBingo", ">\n\n...targeted defense cuts in US support for Ukraine. Anything to help Putin.", ">\n\nOh, the libs will be so owned when the defense budget goes down. How will we ever afford our woke tanks? /s", ">\n\nThere have been many things you voted in favor of or against that I find difficult to understand. The voting rights bill is one. Every American should have easy access to voting.", ">\n\nThey want to Defund the military. They are so soft on national defense.", ">\n\nI am going to need a new supply of popcorn for this and the myriad of other self owning the GOP has hoisted upon itself.", ">\n\nThe GOP played itself it seems.\n\nLess than two weeks after cementing another major increase to the Pentagon budget, lawmakers are now talking about going the opposite direction — and are even raising the specter of across-the-board cuts that rocked the establishment just over a decade ago.\nAn emerging deal between Speaker Kevin McCarthy and conservatives who initially opposed his bid for the gavel looks to exact deep spending cuts. This comes amid a looming partisan fight over the debt limit, compounding fears that overall spending is poised for a return to automatic reductions known as sequestration.\n\n....\n\nTexas Republican Tony Gonzales plans to oppose the rules package in part because of his concerns about national security spending.\n“This has a proposed billions of dollar cut to defense, which I think is a horrible idea when you have [an] aggressive Russia in Ukraine, you have a growing threat of China in the Pacific,” Gonzales said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “How am I going to look at our allies in the eye and say, ‘I need you to increase your defense budget,’ but yet America is going to decrease ours?”\nDefense hawks are eyeing another real increase this year of up to 5 percent to meet threats posed by Russia and China and to mitigate high inflation. And supporters of increased defense spending are now warning up front that they outnumber the budget hardliners in the GOP conference.\n\n....\n\n\"[D]uring negotiations, cuts to defense were NEVER DISCUSSED,” Roy’s office wrote on Twitter. “In fact, there was broad agreement spending cuts should focus on NON-DEFENSE discretionary spending. This means cutting funding for the woke & weaponized bureaucrats that received massive increases under the $1.7 trillion omnibus.”\n\nArticle continues....", ">\n\nOur defense budget is bloated, not because of “work policies,” but due to defense contractors buying off congress. We also spend more on our military than the next 15 or so countries combined. I would support a 10-20% cut to the defense budget if the money saved could go towards social programs, such as free college or paid family leave.", ">\n\nYa. That’s not where it’s going. Those will also be cut.", ">\n\nThere was a time in this country (ending when trump came down the escalator) when republicans were for decreased spending overall but more spending on the military. When they carried pocketbook versions of the constitution in their pockets. When they willingly exported democracy and praised it for the entire world to see.\nObviously that time is gone. Now they want to decrease military spending and overall spending. It's now almost like spending a single dollar is a sin unless it is spent on the culture wars or the Christian movement. That pocket version of the constitution has been replaced with a pocket version of Karl Marx thoughts. And they now export dictatorships as the preferred from of government in the world (Brazil being the latest case).\nThey will rule for the next two years in a slobbering sort of fashion that concentrates on degrading our form of government, attacking our institutions (DOJ, FBI, and IRS come to mind), and sowing as much discontent as possible for our way of American life." ]

[ "Republicans don't want a strong America. Republicans don't believe in America. Republicans don't believe in defending freedom. Republicans are weak on national defense.\netc.", ">\n\nThis is where the party is truly split. There are are still old school Republican hawks that would spend lavishly on defense. Then their is another group, let’s call them Russian assets, whose job is to weaken NATO and alienate American Allies under the guise of fiscal responsibility.", ">\n\nBingo", ">\n\n...targeted defense cuts in US support for Ukraine. Anything to help Putin.", ">\n\nOh, the libs will be so owned when the defense budget goes down. How will we ever afford our woke tanks? /s", ">\n\nThere have been many things you voted in favor of or against that I find difficult to understand. The voting rights bill is one. Every American should have easy access to voting.", ">\n\nThey want to Defund the military. They are so soft on national defense.", ">\n\nI am going to need a new supply of popcorn for this and the myriad of other self owning the GOP has hoisted upon itself.", ">\n\nThe GOP played itself it seems.\n\nLess than two weeks after cementing another major increase to the Pentagon budget, lawmakers are now talking about going the opposite direction — and are even raising the specter of across-the-board cuts that rocked the establishment just over a decade ago.\nAn emerging deal between Speaker Kevin McCarthy and conservatives who initially opposed his bid for the gavel looks to exact deep spending cuts. This comes amid a looming partisan fight over the debt limit, compounding fears that overall spending is poised for a return to automatic reductions known as sequestration.\n\n....\n\nTexas Republican Tony Gonzales plans to oppose the rules package in part because of his concerns about national security spending.\n“This has a proposed billions of dollar cut to defense, which I think is a horrible idea when you have [an] aggressive Russia in Ukraine, you have a growing threat of China in the Pacific,” Gonzales said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “How am I going to look at our allies in the eye and say, ‘I need you to increase your defense budget,’ but yet America is going to decrease ours?”\nDefense hawks are eyeing another real increase this year of up to 5 percent to meet threats posed by Russia and China and to mitigate high inflation. And supporters of increased defense spending are now warning up front that they outnumber the budget hardliners in the GOP conference.\n\n....\n\n\"[D]uring negotiations, cuts to defense were NEVER DISCUSSED,” Roy’s office wrote on Twitter. “In fact, there was broad agreement spending cuts should focus on NON-DEFENSE discretionary spending. This means cutting funding for the woke & weaponized bureaucrats that received massive increases under the $1.7 trillion omnibus.”\n\nArticle continues....", ">\n\nOur defense budget is bloated, not because of “work policies,” but due to defense contractors buying off congress. We also spend more on our military than the next 15 or so countries combined. I would support a 10-20% cut to the defense budget if the money saved could go towards social programs, such as free college or paid family leave.", ">\n\nYa. That’s not where it’s going. Those will also be cut.", ">\n\nThere was a time in this country (ending when trump came down the escalator) when republicans were for decreased spending overall but more spending on the military. When they carried pocketbook versions of the constitution in their pockets. When they willingly exported democracy and praised it for the entire world to see.\nObviously that time is gone. Now they want to decrease military spending and overall spending. It's now almost like spending a single dollar is a sin unless it is spent on the culture wars or the Christian movement. That pocket version of the constitution has been replaced with a pocket version of Karl Marx thoughts. And they now export dictatorships as the preferred from of government in the world (Brazil being the latest case).\nThey will rule for the next two years in a slobbering sort of fashion that concentrates on degrading our form of government, attacking our institutions (DOJ, FBI, and IRS come to mind), and sowing as much discontent as possible for our way of American life.", ">\n\n\nWhen they willingly exported democracy and praised it for the entire world to see.\n\nWe have never exported democracy though.\nWe have murdered tens of thousands of innocent people and propped up controllable political assets quite a few times though" ]

[ "Republicans don't want a strong America. Republicans don't believe in America. Republicans don't believe in defending freedom. Republicans are weak on national defense.\netc.", ">\n\nThis is where the party is truly split. There are are still old school Republican hawks that would spend lavishly on defense. Then their is another group, let’s call them Russian assets, whose job is to weaken NATO and alienate American Allies under the guise of fiscal responsibility.", ">\n\nBingo", ">\n\n...targeted defense cuts in US support for Ukraine. Anything to help Putin.", ">\n\nOh, the libs will be so owned when the defense budget goes down. How will we ever afford our woke tanks? /s", ">\n\nThere have been many things you voted in favor of or against that I find difficult to understand. The voting rights bill is one. Every American should have easy access to voting.", ">\n\nThey want to Defund the military. They are so soft on national defense.", ">\n\nI am going to need a new supply of popcorn for this and the myriad of other self owning the GOP has hoisted upon itself.", ">\n\nThe GOP played itself it seems.\n\nLess than two weeks after cementing another major increase to the Pentagon budget, lawmakers are now talking about going the opposite direction — and are even raising the specter of across-the-board cuts that rocked the establishment just over a decade ago.\nAn emerging deal between Speaker Kevin McCarthy and conservatives who initially opposed his bid for the gavel looks to exact deep spending cuts. This comes amid a looming partisan fight over the debt limit, compounding fears that overall spending is poised for a return to automatic reductions known as sequestration.\n\n....\n\nTexas Republican Tony Gonzales plans to oppose the rules package in part because of his concerns about national security spending.\n“This has a proposed billions of dollar cut to defense, which I think is a horrible idea when you have [an] aggressive Russia in Ukraine, you have a growing threat of China in the Pacific,” Gonzales said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “How am I going to look at our allies in the eye and say, ‘I need you to increase your defense budget,’ but yet America is going to decrease ours?”\nDefense hawks are eyeing another real increase this year of up to 5 percent to meet threats posed by Russia and China and to mitigate high inflation. And supporters of increased defense spending are now warning up front that they outnumber the budget hardliners in the GOP conference.\n\n....\n\n\"[D]uring negotiations, cuts to defense were NEVER DISCUSSED,” Roy’s office wrote on Twitter. “In fact, there was broad agreement spending cuts should focus on NON-DEFENSE discretionary spending. This means cutting funding for the woke & weaponized bureaucrats that received massive increases under the $1.7 trillion omnibus.”\n\nArticle continues....", ">\n\nOur defense budget is bloated, not because of “work policies,” but due to defense contractors buying off congress. We also spend more on our military than the next 15 or so countries combined. I would support a 10-20% cut to the defense budget if the money saved could go towards social programs, such as free college or paid family leave.", ">\n\nYa. That’s not where it’s going. Those will also be cut.", ">\n\nThere was a time in this country (ending when trump came down the escalator) when republicans were for decreased spending overall but more spending on the military. When they carried pocketbook versions of the constitution in their pockets. When they willingly exported democracy and praised it for the entire world to see.\nObviously that time is gone. Now they want to decrease military spending and overall spending. It's now almost like spending a single dollar is a sin unless it is spent on the culture wars or the Christian movement. That pocket version of the constitution has been replaced with a pocket version of Karl Marx thoughts. And they now export dictatorships as the preferred from of government in the world (Brazil being the latest case).\nThey will rule for the next two years in a slobbering sort of fashion that concentrates on degrading our form of government, attacking our institutions (DOJ, FBI, and IRS come to mind), and sowing as much discontent as possible for our way of American life.", ">\n\n\nWhen they willingly exported democracy and praised it for the entire world to see.\n\nWe have never exported democracy though.\nWe have murdered tens of thousands of innocent people and propped up controllable political assets quite a few times though", ">\n\nNever thought I’d see the self-immolation of the GOP on its own brand .. anti-defense, anti-law enforcement, etc.." ]

[ "Republicans don't want a strong America. Republicans don't believe in America. Republicans don't believe in defending freedom. Republicans are weak on national defense.\netc.", ">\n\nThis is where the party is truly split. There are are still old school Republican hawks that would spend lavishly on defense. Then their is another group, let’s call them Russian assets, whose job is to weaken NATO and alienate American Allies under the guise of fiscal responsibility.", ">\n\nBingo", ">\n\n...targeted defense cuts in US support for Ukraine. Anything to help Putin.", ">\n\nOh, the libs will be so owned when the defense budget goes down. How will we ever afford our woke tanks? /s", ">\n\nThere have been many things you voted in favor of or against that I find difficult to understand. The voting rights bill is one. Every American should have easy access to voting.", ">\n\nThey want to Defund the military. They are so soft on national defense.", ">\n\nI am going to need a new supply of popcorn for this and the myriad of other self owning the GOP has hoisted upon itself.", ">\n\nThe GOP played itself it seems.\n\nLess than two weeks after cementing another major increase to the Pentagon budget, lawmakers are now talking about going the opposite direction — and are even raising the specter of across-the-board cuts that rocked the establishment just over a decade ago.\nAn emerging deal between Speaker Kevin McCarthy and conservatives who initially opposed his bid for the gavel looks to exact deep spending cuts. This comes amid a looming partisan fight over the debt limit, compounding fears that overall spending is poised for a return to automatic reductions known as sequestration.\n\n....\n\nTexas Republican Tony Gonzales plans to oppose the rules package in part because of his concerns about national security spending.\n“This has a proposed billions of dollar cut to defense, which I think is a horrible idea when you have [an] aggressive Russia in Ukraine, you have a growing threat of China in the Pacific,” Gonzales said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “How am I going to look at our allies in the eye and say, ‘I need you to increase your defense budget,’ but yet America is going to decrease ours?”\nDefense hawks are eyeing another real increase this year of up to 5 percent to meet threats posed by Russia and China and to mitigate high inflation. And supporters of increased defense spending are now warning up front that they outnumber the budget hardliners in the GOP conference.\n\n....\n\n\"[D]uring negotiations, cuts to defense were NEVER DISCUSSED,” Roy’s office wrote on Twitter. “In fact, there was broad agreement spending cuts should focus on NON-DEFENSE discretionary spending. This means cutting funding for the woke & weaponized bureaucrats that received massive increases under the $1.7 trillion omnibus.”\n\nArticle continues....", ">\n\nOur defense budget is bloated, not because of “work policies,” but due to defense contractors buying off congress. We also spend more on our military than the next 15 or so countries combined. I would support a 10-20% cut to the defense budget if the money saved could go towards social programs, such as free college or paid family leave.", ">\n\nYa. That’s not where it’s going. Those will also be cut.", ">\n\nThere was a time in this country (ending when trump came down the escalator) when republicans were for decreased spending overall but more spending on the military. When they carried pocketbook versions of the constitution in their pockets. When they willingly exported democracy and praised it for the entire world to see.\nObviously that time is gone. Now they want to decrease military spending and overall spending. It's now almost like spending a single dollar is a sin unless it is spent on the culture wars or the Christian movement. That pocket version of the constitution has been replaced with a pocket version of Karl Marx thoughts. And they now export dictatorships as the preferred from of government in the world (Brazil being the latest case).\nThey will rule for the next two years in a slobbering sort of fashion that concentrates on degrading our form of government, attacking our institutions (DOJ, FBI, and IRS come to mind), and sowing as much discontent as possible for our way of American life.", ">\n\n\nWhen they willingly exported democracy and praised it for the entire world to see.\n\nWe have never exported democracy though.\nWe have murdered tens of thousands of innocent people and propped up controllable political assets quite a few times though", ">\n\nNever thought I’d see the self-immolation of the GOP on its own brand .. anti-defense, anti-law enforcement, etc..", ">\n\nThe Reagan era Defense massacre resulted in a bloodbath in congress, as entire state economies were devastated by base closures, and defense plant downsizings." ]

[ "Republicans don't want a strong America. Republicans don't believe in America. Republicans don't believe in defending freedom. Republicans are weak on national defense.\netc.", ">\n\nThis is where the party is truly split. There are are still old school Republican hawks that would spend lavishly on defense. Then their is another group, let’s call them Russian assets, whose job is to weaken NATO and alienate American Allies under the guise of fiscal responsibility.", ">\n\nBingo", ">\n\n...targeted defense cuts in US support for Ukraine. Anything to help Putin.", ">\n\nOh, the libs will be so owned when the defense budget goes down. How will we ever afford our woke tanks? /s", ">\n\nThere have been many things you voted in favor of or against that I find difficult to understand. The voting rights bill is one. Every American should have easy access to voting.", ">\n\nThey want to Defund the military. They are so soft on national defense.", ">\n\nI am going to need a new supply of popcorn for this and the myriad of other self owning the GOP has hoisted upon itself.", ">\n\nThe GOP played itself it seems.\n\nLess than two weeks after cementing another major increase to the Pentagon budget, lawmakers are now talking about going the opposite direction — and are even raising the specter of across-the-board cuts that rocked the establishment just over a decade ago.\nAn emerging deal between Speaker Kevin McCarthy and conservatives who initially opposed his bid for the gavel looks to exact deep spending cuts. This comes amid a looming partisan fight over the debt limit, compounding fears that overall spending is poised for a return to automatic reductions known as sequestration.\n\n....\n\nTexas Republican Tony Gonzales plans to oppose the rules package in part because of his concerns about national security spending.\n“This has a proposed billions of dollar cut to defense, which I think is a horrible idea when you have [an] aggressive Russia in Ukraine, you have a growing threat of China in the Pacific,” Gonzales said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “How am I going to look at our allies in the eye and say, ‘I need you to increase your defense budget,’ but yet America is going to decrease ours?”\nDefense hawks are eyeing another real increase this year of up to 5 percent to meet threats posed by Russia and China and to mitigate high inflation. And supporters of increased defense spending are now warning up front that they outnumber the budget hardliners in the GOP conference.\n\n....\n\n\"[D]uring negotiations, cuts to defense were NEVER DISCUSSED,” Roy’s office wrote on Twitter. “In fact, there was broad agreement spending cuts should focus on NON-DEFENSE discretionary spending. This means cutting funding for the woke & weaponized bureaucrats that received massive increases under the $1.7 trillion omnibus.”\n\nArticle continues....", ">\n\nOur defense budget is bloated, not because of “work policies,” but due to defense contractors buying off congress. We also spend more on our military than the next 15 or so countries combined. I would support a 10-20% cut to the defense budget if the money saved could go towards social programs, such as free college or paid family leave.", ">\n\nYa. That’s not where it’s going. Those will also be cut.", ">\n\nThere was a time in this country (ending when trump came down the escalator) when republicans were for decreased spending overall but more spending on the military. When they carried pocketbook versions of the constitution in their pockets. When they willingly exported democracy and praised it for the entire world to see.\nObviously that time is gone. Now they want to decrease military spending and overall spending. It's now almost like spending a single dollar is a sin unless it is spent on the culture wars or the Christian movement. That pocket version of the constitution has been replaced with a pocket version of Karl Marx thoughts. And they now export dictatorships as the preferred from of government in the world (Brazil being the latest case).\nThey will rule for the next two years in a slobbering sort of fashion that concentrates on degrading our form of government, attacking our institutions (DOJ, FBI, and IRS come to mind), and sowing as much discontent as possible for our way of American life.", ">\n\n\nWhen they willingly exported democracy and praised it for the entire world to see.\n\nWe have never exported democracy though.\nWe have murdered tens of thousands of innocent people and propped up controllable political assets quite a few times though", ">\n\nNever thought I’d see the self-immolation of the GOP on its own brand .. anti-defense, anti-law enforcement, etc..", ">\n\nThe Reagan era Defense massacre resulted in a bloodbath in congress, as entire state economies were devastated by base closures, and defense plant downsizings.", ">\n\nI fear they will try to cut US military aid to Ukraine." ]

[ "Republicans don't want a strong America. Republicans don't believe in America. Republicans don't believe in defending freedom. Republicans are weak on national defense.\netc.", ">\n\nThis is where the party is truly split. There are are still old school Republican hawks that would spend lavishly on defense. Then their is another group, let’s call them Russian assets, whose job is to weaken NATO and alienate American Allies under the guise of fiscal responsibility.", ">\n\nBingo", ">\n\n...targeted defense cuts in US support for Ukraine. Anything to help Putin.", ">\n\nOh, the libs will be so owned when the defense budget goes down. How will we ever afford our woke tanks? /s", ">\n\nThere have been many things you voted in favor of or against that I find difficult to understand. The voting rights bill is one. Every American should have easy access to voting.", ">\n\nThey want to Defund the military. They are so soft on national defense.", ">\n\nI am going to need a new supply of popcorn for this and the myriad of other self owning the GOP has hoisted upon itself.", ">\n\nThe GOP played itself it seems.\n\nLess than two weeks after cementing another major increase to the Pentagon budget, lawmakers are now talking about going the opposite direction — and are even raising the specter of across-the-board cuts that rocked the establishment just over a decade ago.\nAn emerging deal between Speaker Kevin McCarthy and conservatives who initially opposed his bid for the gavel looks to exact deep spending cuts. This comes amid a looming partisan fight over the debt limit, compounding fears that overall spending is poised for a return to automatic reductions known as sequestration.\n\n....\n\nTexas Republican Tony Gonzales plans to oppose the rules package in part because of his concerns about national security spending.\n“This has a proposed billions of dollar cut to defense, which I think is a horrible idea when you have [an] aggressive Russia in Ukraine, you have a growing threat of China in the Pacific,” Gonzales said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “How am I going to look at our allies in the eye and say, ‘I need you to increase your defense budget,’ but yet America is going to decrease ours?”\nDefense hawks are eyeing another real increase this year of up to 5 percent to meet threats posed by Russia and China and to mitigate high inflation. And supporters of increased defense spending are now warning up front that they outnumber the budget hardliners in the GOP conference.\n\n....\n\n\"[D]uring negotiations, cuts to defense were NEVER DISCUSSED,” Roy’s office wrote on Twitter. “In fact, there was broad agreement spending cuts should focus on NON-DEFENSE discretionary spending. This means cutting funding for the woke & weaponized bureaucrats that received massive increases under the $1.7 trillion omnibus.”\n\nArticle continues....", ">\n\nOur defense budget is bloated, not because of “work policies,” but due to defense contractors buying off congress. We also spend more on our military than the next 15 or so countries combined. I would support a 10-20% cut to the defense budget if the money saved could go towards social programs, such as free college or paid family leave.", ">\n\nYa. That’s not where it’s going. Those will also be cut.", ">\n\nThere was a time in this country (ending when trump came down the escalator) when republicans were for decreased spending overall but more spending on the military. When they carried pocketbook versions of the constitution in their pockets. When they willingly exported democracy and praised it for the entire world to see.\nObviously that time is gone. Now they want to decrease military spending and overall spending. It's now almost like spending a single dollar is a sin unless it is spent on the culture wars or the Christian movement. That pocket version of the constitution has been replaced with a pocket version of Karl Marx thoughts. And they now export dictatorships as the preferred from of government in the world (Brazil being the latest case).\nThey will rule for the next two years in a slobbering sort of fashion that concentrates on degrading our form of government, attacking our institutions (DOJ, FBI, and IRS come to mind), and sowing as much discontent as possible for our way of American life.", ">\n\n\nWhen they willingly exported democracy and praised it for the entire world to see.\n\nWe have never exported democracy though.\nWe have murdered tens of thousands of innocent people and propped up controllable political assets quite a few times though", ">\n\nNever thought I’d see the self-immolation of the GOP on its own brand .. anti-defense, anti-law enforcement, etc..", ">\n\nThe Reagan era Defense massacre resulted in a bloodbath in congress, as entire state economies were devastated by base closures, and defense plant downsizings.", ">\n\nI fear they will try to cut US military aid to Ukraine.", ">\n\nI think the seditious end of the house had that in mind in the negotiations. They haven't been exactly silent about not supporting Ukraine." ]

[ "Republicans don't want a strong America. Republicans don't believe in America. Republicans don't believe in defending freedom. Republicans are weak on national defense.\netc.", ">\n\nThis is where the party is truly split. There are are still old school Republican hawks that would spend lavishly on defense. Then their is another group, let’s call them Russian assets, whose job is to weaken NATO and alienate American Allies under the guise of fiscal responsibility.", ">\n\nBingo", ">\n\n...targeted defense cuts in US support for Ukraine. Anything to help Putin.", ">\n\nOh, the libs will be so owned when the defense budget goes down. How will we ever afford our woke tanks? /s", ">\n\nThere have been many things you voted in favor of or against that I find difficult to understand. The voting rights bill is one. Every American should have easy access to voting.", ">\n\nThey want to Defund the military. They are so soft on national defense.", ">\n\nI am going to need a new supply of popcorn for this and the myriad of other self owning the GOP has hoisted upon itself.", ">\n\nThe GOP played itself it seems.\n\nLess than two weeks after cementing another major increase to the Pentagon budget, lawmakers are now talking about going the opposite direction — and are even raising the specter of across-the-board cuts that rocked the establishment just over a decade ago.\nAn emerging deal between Speaker Kevin McCarthy and conservatives who initially opposed his bid for the gavel looks to exact deep spending cuts. This comes amid a looming partisan fight over the debt limit, compounding fears that overall spending is poised for a return to automatic reductions known as sequestration.\n\n....\n\nTexas Republican Tony Gonzales plans to oppose the rules package in part because of his concerns about national security spending.\n“This has a proposed billions of dollar cut to defense, which I think is a horrible idea when you have [an] aggressive Russia in Ukraine, you have a growing threat of China in the Pacific,” Gonzales said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “How am I going to look at our allies in the eye and say, ‘I need you to increase your defense budget,’ but yet America is going to decrease ours?”\nDefense hawks are eyeing another real increase this year of up to 5 percent to meet threats posed by Russia and China and to mitigate high inflation. And supporters of increased defense spending are now warning up front that they outnumber the budget hardliners in the GOP conference.\n\n....\n\n\"[D]uring negotiations, cuts to defense were NEVER DISCUSSED,” Roy’s office wrote on Twitter. “In fact, there was broad agreement spending cuts should focus on NON-DEFENSE discretionary spending. This means cutting funding for the woke & weaponized bureaucrats that received massive increases under the $1.7 trillion omnibus.”\n\nArticle continues....", ">\n\nOur defense budget is bloated, not because of “work policies,” but due to defense contractors buying off congress. We also spend more on our military than the next 15 or so countries combined. I would support a 10-20% cut to the defense budget if the money saved could go towards social programs, such as free college or paid family leave.", ">\n\nYa. That’s not where it’s going. Those will also be cut.", ">\n\nThere was a time in this country (ending when trump came down the escalator) when republicans were for decreased spending overall but more spending on the military. When they carried pocketbook versions of the constitution in their pockets. When they willingly exported democracy and praised it for the entire world to see.\nObviously that time is gone. Now they want to decrease military spending and overall spending. It's now almost like spending a single dollar is a sin unless it is spent on the culture wars or the Christian movement. That pocket version of the constitution has been replaced with a pocket version of Karl Marx thoughts. And they now export dictatorships as the preferred from of government in the world (Brazil being the latest case).\nThey will rule for the next two years in a slobbering sort of fashion that concentrates on degrading our form of government, attacking our institutions (DOJ, FBI, and IRS come to mind), and sowing as much discontent as possible for our way of American life.", ">\n\n\nWhen they willingly exported democracy and praised it for the entire world to see.\n\nWe have never exported democracy though.\nWe have murdered tens of thousands of innocent people and propped up controllable political assets quite a few times though", ">\n\nNever thought I’d see the self-immolation of the GOP on its own brand .. anti-defense, anti-law enforcement, etc..", ">\n\nThe Reagan era Defense massacre resulted in a bloodbath in congress, as entire state economies were devastated by base closures, and defense plant downsizings.", ">\n\nI fear they will try to cut US military aid to Ukraine.", ">\n\nI think the seditious end of the house had that in mind in the negotiations. They haven't been exactly silent about not supporting Ukraine.", ">\n\nLibs -> defund the police. \nGOP -> defund everything beneficial to our constituents." ]

[ "Republicans don't want a strong America. Republicans don't believe in America. Republicans don't believe in defending freedom. Republicans are weak on national defense.\netc.", ">\n\nThis is where the party is truly split. There are are still old school Republican hawks that would spend lavishly on defense. Then their is another group, let’s call them Russian assets, whose job is to weaken NATO and alienate American Allies under the guise of fiscal responsibility.", ">\n\nBingo", ">\n\n...targeted defense cuts in US support for Ukraine. Anything to help Putin.", ">\n\nOh, the libs will be so owned when the defense budget goes down. How will we ever afford our woke tanks? /s", ">\n\nThere have been many things you voted in favor of or against that I find difficult to understand. The voting rights bill is one. Every American should have easy access to voting.", ">\n\nThey want to Defund the military. They are so soft on national defense.", ">\n\nI am going to need a new supply of popcorn for this and the myriad of other self owning the GOP has hoisted upon itself.", ">\n\nThe GOP played itself it seems.\n\nLess than two weeks after cementing another major increase to the Pentagon budget, lawmakers are now talking about going the opposite direction — and are even raising the specter of across-the-board cuts that rocked the establishment just over a decade ago.\nAn emerging deal between Speaker Kevin McCarthy and conservatives who initially opposed his bid for the gavel looks to exact deep spending cuts. This comes amid a looming partisan fight over the debt limit, compounding fears that overall spending is poised for a return to automatic reductions known as sequestration.\n\n....\n\nTexas Republican Tony Gonzales plans to oppose the rules package in part because of his concerns about national security spending.\n“This has a proposed billions of dollar cut to defense, which I think is a horrible idea when you have [an] aggressive Russia in Ukraine, you have a growing threat of China in the Pacific,” Gonzales said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “How am I going to look at our allies in the eye and say, ‘I need you to increase your defense budget,’ but yet America is going to decrease ours?”\nDefense hawks are eyeing another real increase this year of up to 5 percent to meet threats posed by Russia and China and to mitigate high inflation. And supporters of increased defense spending are now warning up front that they outnumber the budget hardliners in the GOP conference.\n\n....\n\n\"[D]uring negotiations, cuts to defense were NEVER DISCUSSED,” Roy’s office wrote on Twitter. “In fact, there was broad agreement spending cuts should focus on NON-DEFENSE discretionary spending. This means cutting funding for the woke & weaponized bureaucrats that received massive increases under the $1.7 trillion omnibus.”\n\nArticle continues....", ">\n\nOur defense budget is bloated, not because of “work policies,” but due to defense contractors buying off congress. We also spend more on our military than the next 15 or so countries combined. I would support a 10-20% cut to the defense budget if the money saved could go towards social programs, such as free college or paid family leave.", ">\n\nYa. That’s not where it’s going. Those will also be cut.", ">\n\nThere was a time in this country (ending when trump came down the escalator) when republicans were for decreased spending overall but more spending on the military. When they carried pocketbook versions of the constitution in their pockets. When they willingly exported democracy and praised it for the entire world to see.\nObviously that time is gone. Now they want to decrease military spending and overall spending. It's now almost like spending a single dollar is a sin unless it is spent on the culture wars or the Christian movement. That pocket version of the constitution has been replaced with a pocket version of Karl Marx thoughts. And they now export dictatorships as the preferred from of government in the world (Brazil being the latest case).\nThey will rule for the next two years in a slobbering sort of fashion that concentrates on degrading our form of government, attacking our institutions (DOJ, FBI, and IRS come to mind), and sowing as much discontent as possible for our way of American life.", ">\n\n\nWhen they willingly exported democracy and praised it for the entire world to see.\n\nWe have never exported democracy though.\nWe have murdered tens of thousands of innocent people and propped up controllable political assets quite a few times though", ">\n\nNever thought I’d see the self-immolation of the GOP on its own brand .. anti-defense, anti-law enforcement, etc..", ">\n\nThe Reagan era Defense massacre resulted in a bloodbath in congress, as entire state economies were devastated by base closures, and defense plant downsizings.", ">\n\nI fear they will try to cut US military aid to Ukraine.", ">\n\nI think the seditious end of the house had that in mind in the negotiations. They haven't been exactly silent about not supporting Ukraine.", ">\n\nLibs -> defund the police. \nGOP -> defund everything beneficial to our constituents.", ">\n\nNo need to wig out he’s going toupé for it eventually." ]

[]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it." ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it." ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa" ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic." ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending." ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending.", ">\n\ninequality is due to money, not the owners. there is no world where the capital stabilizes all of the beholders on equal ground" ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending.", ">\n\ninequality is due to money, not the owners. there is no world where the capital stabilizes all of the beholders on equal ground", ">\n\nWhile that's a good statement to make, in current scenario, it's like saying that high murder rates in Mexico isn't due to the gangs but due to guns" ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending.", ">\n\ninequality is due to money, not the owners. there is no world where the capital stabilizes all of the beholders on equal ground", ">\n\nWhile that's a good statement to make, in current scenario, it's like saying that high murder rates in Mexico isn't due to the gangs but due to guns", ">\n\nThe high murder rates in Mexico aren't due to gangs or guns, those are the symptoms, not the cause. The cause are political realities that encourage violence as an effective strategy for managing narcotics distribution, mostly the demand for drugs in the united states. If you could snap your fingers and replace every single person in mexico with people from say... finland with no other changes, you'd end up with the same drug violence after a short period of time, because people are largely the same everywhere. Systems are the only thing that really differs.\nSame goes for billionaires. They exist and are harmful because the economic system we live in allows them to. They're not uniquely bad people who just so happened to have a lot of money, and if only some other people had all that money things would be better. They're a symptom of the problem of economic policy not checking the natural tendencies of capital in a free market to flow towards an ever increasingly small number of people. I'm not saying you're wrong and that CEOs really are responsible for income inequality, but that no one group of people is. The systems we choose to put in place are to blame." ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending.", ">\n\ninequality is due to money, not the owners. there is no world where the capital stabilizes all of the beholders on equal ground", ">\n\nWhile that's a good statement to make, in current scenario, it's like saying that high murder rates in Mexico isn't due to the gangs but due to guns", ">\n\nThe high murder rates in Mexico aren't due to gangs or guns, those are the symptoms, not the cause. The cause are political realities that encourage violence as an effective strategy for managing narcotics distribution, mostly the demand for drugs in the united states. If you could snap your fingers and replace every single person in mexico with people from say... finland with no other changes, you'd end up with the same drug violence after a short period of time, because people are largely the same everywhere. Systems are the only thing that really differs.\nSame goes for billionaires. They exist and are harmful because the economic system we live in allows them to. They're not uniquely bad people who just so happened to have a lot of money, and if only some other people had all that money things would be better. They're a symptom of the problem of economic policy not checking the natural tendencies of capital in a free market to flow towards an ever increasingly small number of people. I'm not saying you're wrong and that CEOs really are responsible for income inequality, but that no one group of people is. The systems we choose to put in place are to blame.", ">\n\nDefinitely, the system we have is one of the reasons for billionaires to exist and I'm not saying they are necessarily bad people but they are often disconnected from ground realities and don't have empathy for the masses. Kinda how people will dehumanize someone with 10X less income than us." ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending.", ">\n\ninequality is due to money, not the owners. there is no world where the capital stabilizes all of the beholders on equal ground", ">\n\nWhile that's a good statement to make, in current scenario, it's like saying that high murder rates in Mexico isn't due to the gangs but due to guns", ">\n\nThe high murder rates in Mexico aren't due to gangs or guns, those are the symptoms, not the cause. The cause are political realities that encourage violence as an effective strategy for managing narcotics distribution, mostly the demand for drugs in the united states. If you could snap your fingers and replace every single person in mexico with people from say... finland with no other changes, you'd end up with the same drug violence after a short period of time, because people are largely the same everywhere. Systems are the only thing that really differs.\nSame goes for billionaires. They exist and are harmful because the economic system we live in allows them to. They're not uniquely bad people who just so happened to have a lot of money, and if only some other people had all that money things would be better. They're a symptom of the problem of economic policy not checking the natural tendencies of capital in a free market to flow towards an ever increasingly small number of people. I'm not saying you're wrong and that CEOs really are responsible for income inequality, but that no one group of people is. The systems we choose to put in place are to blame.", ">\n\nDefinitely, the system we have is one of the reasons for billionaires to exist and I'm not saying they are necessarily bad people but they are often disconnected from ground realities and don't have empathy for the masses. Kinda how people will dehumanize someone with 10X less income than us.", ">\n\nBillionaires are bad because they own the means of production and exploit the labour of everyone that works for them to a much greater extent than others. CEOs aren’t as bad, but they still exploit their employees and their class interests align with billionaires in maintaining private ownership over the means of production. \nIf a working class revolution was ever a realistic possibility, most CEOs would be on the side of capitalism against the working class. They have too much to lose." ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending.", ">\n\ninequality is due to money, not the owners. there is no world where the capital stabilizes all of the beholders on equal ground", ">\n\nWhile that's a good statement to make, in current scenario, it's like saying that high murder rates in Mexico isn't due to the gangs but due to guns", ">\n\nThe high murder rates in Mexico aren't due to gangs or guns, those are the symptoms, not the cause. The cause are political realities that encourage violence as an effective strategy for managing narcotics distribution, mostly the demand for drugs in the united states. If you could snap your fingers and replace every single person in mexico with people from say... finland with no other changes, you'd end up with the same drug violence after a short period of time, because people are largely the same everywhere. Systems are the only thing that really differs.\nSame goes for billionaires. They exist and are harmful because the economic system we live in allows them to. They're not uniquely bad people who just so happened to have a lot of money, and if only some other people had all that money things would be better. They're a symptom of the problem of economic policy not checking the natural tendencies of capital in a free market to flow towards an ever increasingly small number of people. I'm not saying you're wrong and that CEOs really are responsible for income inequality, but that no one group of people is. The systems we choose to put in place are to blame.", ">\n\nDefinitely, the system we have is one of the reasons for billionaires to exist and I'm not saying they are necessarily bad people but they are often disconnected from ground realities and don't have empathy for the masses. Kinda how people will dehumanize someone with 10X less income than us.", ">\n\nBillionaires are bad because they own the means of production and exploit the labour of everyone that works for them to a much greater extent than others. CEOs aren’t as bad, but they still exploit their employees and their class interests align with billionaires in maintaining private ownership over the means of production. \nIf a working class revolution was ever a realistic possibility, most CEOs would be on the side of capitalism against the working class. They have too much to lose.", ">\n\nYou should focus on the vehicles that make loopholes against wealth gathering such as Trusts and Board seats" ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending.", ">\n\ninequality is due to money, not the owners. there is no world where the capital stabilizes all of the beholders on equal ground", ">\n\nWhile that's a good statement to make, in current scenario, it's like saying that high murder rates in Mexico isn't due to the gangs but due to guns", ">\n\nThe high murder rates in Mexico aren't due to gangs or guns, those are the symptoms, not the cause. The cause are political realities that encourage violence as an effective strategy for managing narcotics distribution, mostly the demand for drugs in the united states. If you could snap your fingers and replace every single person in mexico with people from say... finland with no other changes, you'd end up with the same drug violence after a short period of time, because people are largely the same everywhere. Systems are the only thing that really differs.\nSame goes for billionaires. They exist and are harmful because the economic system we live in allows them to. They're not uniquely bad people who just so happened to have a lot of money, and if only some other people had all that money things would be better. They're a symptom of the problem of economic policy not checking the natural tendencies of capital in a free market to flow towards an ever increasingly small number of people. I'm not saying you're wrong and that CEOs really are responsible for income inequality, but that no one group of people is. The systems we choose to put in place are to blame.", ">\n\nDefinitely, the system we have is one of the reasons for billionaires to exist and I'm not saying they are necessarily bad people but they are often disconnected from ground realities and don't have empathy for the masses. Kinda how people will dehumanize someone with 10X less income than us.", ">\n\nBillionaires are bad because they own the means of production and exploit the labour of everyone that works for them to a much greater extent than others. CEOs aren’t as bad, but they still exploit their employees and their class interests align with billionaires in maintaining private ownership over the means of production. \nIf a working class revolution was ever a realistic possibility, most CEOs would be on the side of capitalism against the working class. They have too much to lose.", ">\n\nYou should focus on the vehicles that make loopholes against wealth gathering such as Trusts and Board seats", ">\n\nWealth gathering only exists because private property exists. Trusts and board seats have nothing to do with it." ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending.", ">\n\ninequality is due to money, not the owners. there is no world where the capital stabilizes all of the beholders on equal ground", ">\n\nWhile that's a good statement to make, in current scenario, it's like saying that high murder rates in Mexico isn't due to the gangs but due to guns", ">\n\nThe high murder rates in Mexico aren't due to gangs or guns, those are the symptoms, not the cause. The cause are political realities that encourage violence as an effective strategy for managing narcotics distribution, mostly the demand for drugs in the united states. If you could snap your fingers and replace every single person in mexico with people from say... finland with no other changes, you'd end up with the same drug violence after a short period of time, because people are largely the same everywhere. Systems are the only thing that really differs.\nSame goes for billionaires. They exist and are harmful because the economic system we live in allows them to. They're not uniquely bad people who just so happened to have a lot of money, and if only some other people had all that money things would be better. They're a symptom of the problem of economic policy not checking the natural tendencies of capital in a free market to flow towards an ever increasingly small number of people. I'm not saying you're wrong and that CEOs really are responsible for income inequality, but that no one group of people is. The systems we choose to put in place are to blame.", ">\n\nDefinitely, the system we have is one of the reasons for billionaires to exist and I'm not saying they are necessarily bad people but they are often disconnected from ground realities and don't have empathy for the masses. Kinda how people will dehumanize someone with 10X less income than us.", ">\n\nBillionaires are bad because they own the means of production and exploit the labour of everyone that works for them to a much greater extent than others. CEOs aren’t as bad, but they still exploit their employees and their class interests align with billionaires in maintaining private ownership over the means of production. \nIf a working class revolution was ever a realistic possibility, most CEOs would be on the side of capitalism against the working class. They have too much to lose.", ">\n\nYou should focus on the vehicles that make loopholes against wealth gathering such as Trusts and Board seats", ">\n\nWealth gathering only exists because private property exists. Trusts and board seats have nothing to do with it.", ">\n\nThe framing of this is a little difficult because they aren't a 1:1 comparison. \nBillionaires certainly play a role in the passive accumulation of wealth. And I'm using passive to mean, they are allocating capital, lobbying for privilege and deploy indirect power in our economy. However this is generally private, away from the public. \nCEOs are the public faces of institutions that absorb our incomes via the market and return some % of that value back to consumers via labour. Businesses are the vehicles billionaires use to extract wealth from the population. \nIt's very obvious why the public heavily focuses on the institution they have deal with face to face, for the vast majority of their lives. Marketing even reminds us they exist. Billionaires are a tiny group that are surrounded by privacy and security. I couldn't locate a billionaire if I tried but I could easily find a bank. \nThe public are angry at the highly visible vehicle of wealth inequality rather than the beneficiaries of wealth inequality that are purposely hidden." ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending.", ">\n\ninequality is due to money, not the owners. there is no world where the capital stabilizes all of the beholders on equal ground", ">\n\nWhile that's a good statement to make, in current scenario, it's like saying that high murder rates in Mexico isn't due to the gangs but due to guns", ">\n\nThe high murder rates in Mexico aren't due to gangs or guns, those are the symptoms, not the cause. The cause are political realities that encourage violence as an effective strategy for managing narcotics distribution, mostly the demand for drugs in the united states. If you could snap your fingers and replace every single person in mexico with people from say... finland with no other changes, you'd end up with the same drug violence after a short period of time, because people are largely the same everywhere. Systems are the only thing that really differs.\nSame goes for billionaires. They exist and are harmful because the economic system we live in allows them to. They're not uniquely bad people who just so happened to have a lot of money, and if only some other people had all that money things would be better. They're a symptom of the problem of economic policy not checking the natural tendencies of capital in a free market to flow towards an ever increasingly small number of people. I'm not saying you're wrong and that CEOs really are responsible for income inequality, but that no one group of people is. The systems we choose to put in place are to blame.", ">\n\nDefinitely, the system we have is one of the reasons for billionaires to exist and I'm not saying they are necessarily bad people but they are often disconnected from ground realities and don't have empathy for the masses. Kinda how people will dehumanize someone with 10X less income than us.", ">\n\nBillionaires are bad because they own the means of production and exploit the labour of everyone that works for them to a much greater extent than others. CEOs aren’t as bad, but they still exploit their employees and their class interests align with billionaires in maintaining private ownership over the means of production. \nIf a working class revolution was ever a realistic possibility, most CEOs would be on the side of capitalism against the working class. They have too much to lose.", ">\n\nYou should focus on the vehicles that make loopholes against wealth gathering such as Trusts and Board seats", ">\n\nWealth gathering only exists because private property exists. Trusts and board seats have nothing to do with it.", ">\n\nThe framing of this is a little difficult because they aren't a 1:1 comparison. \nBillionaires certainly play a role in the passive accumulation of wealth. And I'm using passive to mean, they are allocating capital, lobbying for privilege and deploy indirect power in our economy. However this is generally private, away from the public. \nCEOs are the public faces of institutions that absorb our incomes via the market and return some % of that value back to consumers via labour. Businesses are the vehicles billionaires use to extract wealth from the population. \nIt's very obvious why the public heavily focuses on the institution they have deal with face to face, for the vast majority of their lives. Marketing even reminds us they exist. Billionaires are a tiny group that are surrounded by privacy and security. I couldn't locate a billionaire if I tried but I could easily find a bank. \nThe public are angry at the highly visible vehicle of wealth inequality rather than the beneficiaries of wealth inequality that are purposely hidden.", ">\n\nLet's say we eliminate all billionaires and confiscate their entire net worth. That gives us a pool of $13.6 trillion dollars. Now in reality you could never do this since net worth doesn't transfer directly into liquid cash and if you made Jeff Bezo sell off his $90 billion worth of amazon stock all at once you wouldn't get $90 billion for it, but let's just pretend. \nSo let's take that $13.6 trillion and equally distribute it among the world population. That's $1700 a person. In the US that's less money per person than the total of what was given out by the government in the form of Covid stimulus. \nDoes this solve inequality? Obviously not. In America $1700 isn't going to make a dent in income inequality because you still have some people making 20k a year while others are making 80k and a one time injection of $1700 isn't going to change that. So if eliminating all billionaires and redistributing their wealth doesn't solve income inequality then Billionaires are not the cause. \nThe problem has a lot more to do with concentration of resources in specific countries. The bottom quartile in America live downright lavish lives compared to a Vietnamese subsistence farmer or a Guatemalan factory worker. While the subsistence farmer breaks his back 12 hours a day 7 days a week farming just enough food to get by and lives a life of hunger and malnourishment, food is so plentiful and cheap in America that for the first time in human history being overweight is correlated with being poor. American household hold over $98 trillion in wealth while only $5 trillion of that belongs to billionaires. America as a whole makes up only 4% of the world population but holds 25% of the worlds wealth." ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending.", ">\n\ninequality is due to money, not the owners. there is no world where the capital stabilizes all of the beholders on equal ground", ">\n\nWhile that's a good statement to make, in current scenario, it's like saying that high murder rates in Mexico isn't due to the gangs but due to guns", ">\n\nThe high murder rates in Mexico aren't due to gangs or guns, those are the symptoms, not the cause. The cause are political realities that encourage violence as an effective strategy for managing narcotics distribution, mostly the demand for drugs in the united states. If you could snap your fingers and replace every single person in mexico with people from say... finland with no other changes, you'd end up with the same drug violence after a short period of time, because people are largely the same everywhere. Systems are the only thing that really differs.\nSame goes for billionaires. They exist and are harmful because the economic system we live in allows them to. They're not uniquely bad people who just so happened to have a lot of money, and if only some other people had all that money things would be better. They're a symptom of the problem of economic policy not checking the natural tendencies of capital in a free market to flow towards an ever increasingly small number of people. I'm not saying you're wrong and that CEOs really are responsible for income inequality, but that no one group of people is. The systems we choose to put in place are to blame.", ">\n\nDefinitely, the system we have is one of the reasons for billionaires to exist and I'm not saying they are necessarily bad people but they are often disconnected from ground realities and don't have empathy for the masses. Kinda how people will dehumanize someone with 10X less income than us.", ">\n\nBillionaires are bad because they own the means of production and exploit the labour of everyone that works for them to a much greater extent than others. CEOs aren’t as bad, but they still exploit their employees and their class interests align with billionaires in maintaining private ownership over the means of production. \nIf a working class revolution was ever a realistic possibility, most CEOs would be on the side of capitalism against the working class. They have too much to lose.", ">\n\nYou should focus on the vehicles that make loopholes against wealth gathering such as Trusts and Board seats", ">\n\nWealth gathering only exists because private property exists. Trusts and board seats have nothing to do with it.", ">\n\nThe framing of this is a little difficult because they aren't a 1:1 comparison. \nBillionaires certainly play a role in the passive accumulation of wealth. And I'm using passive to mean, they are allocating capital, lobbying for privilege and deploy indirect power in our economy. However this is generally private, away from the public. \nCEOs are the public faces of institutions that absorb our incomes via the market and return some % of that value back to consumers via labour. Businesses are the vehicles billionaires use to extract wealth from the population. \nIt's very obvious why the public heavily focuses on the institution they have deal with face to face, for the vast majority of their lives. Marketing even reminds us they exist. Billionaires are a tiny group that are surrounded by privacy and security. I couldn't locate a billionaire if I tried but I could easily find a bank. \nThe public are angry at the highly visible vehicle of wealth inequality rather than the beneficiaries of wealth inequality that are purposely hidden.", ">\n\nLet's say we eliminate all billionaires and confiscate their entire net worth. That gives us a pool of $13.6 trillion dollars. Now in reality you could never do this since net worth doesn't transfer directly into liquid cash and if you made Jeff Bezo sell off his $90 billion worth of amazon stock all at once you wouldn't get $90 billion for it, but let's just pretend. \nSo let's take that $13.6 trillion and equally distribute it among the world population. That's $1700 a person. In the US that's less money per person than the total of what was given out by the government in the form of Covid stimulus. \nDoes this solve inequality? Obviously not. In America $1700 isn't going to make a dent in income inequality because you still have some people making 20k a year while others are making 80k and a one time injection of $1700 isn't going to change that. So if eliminating all billionaires and redistributing their wealth doesn't solve income inequality then Billionaires are not the cause. \nThe problem has a lot more to do with concentration of resources in specific countries. The bottom quartile in America live downright lavish lives compared to a Vietnamese subsistence farmer or a Guatemalan factory worker. While the subsistence farmer breaks his back 12 hours a day 7 days a week farming just enough food to get by and lives a life of hunger and malnourishment, food is so plentiful and cheap in America that for the first time in human history being overweight is correlated with being poor. American household hold over $98 trillion in wealth while only $5 trillion of that belongs to billionaires. America as a whole makes up only 4% of the world population but holds 25% of the worlds wealth.", ">\n\nIf nobody on earth had more wealth than $999,999,999.99, would income/wealth inequality still be a problem? Yes. Therefore inequality is not merely due to the existence of billionaires." ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending.", ">\n\ninequality is due to money, not the owners. there is no world where the capital stabilizes all of the beholders on equal ground", ">\n\nWhile that's a good statement to make, in current scenario, it's like saying that high murder rates in Mexico isn't due to the gangs but due to guns", ">\n\nThe high murder rates in Mexico aren't due to gangs or guns, those are the symptoms, not the cause. The cause are political realities that encourage violence as an effective strategy for managing narcotics distribution, mostly the demand for drugs in the united states. If you could snap your fingers and replace every single person in mexico with people from say... finland with no other changes, you'd end up with the same drug violence after a short period of time, because people are largely the same everywhere. Systems are the only thing that really differs.\nSame goes for billionaires. They exist and are harmful because the economic system we live in allows them to. They're not uniquely bad people who just so happened to have a lot of money, and if only some other people had all that money things would be better. They're a symptom of the problem of economic policy not checking the natural tendencies of capital in a free market to flow towards an ever increasingly small number of people. I'm not saying you're wrong and that CEOs really are responsible for income inequality, but that no one group of people is. The systems we choose to put in place are to blame.", ">\n\nDefinitely, the system we have is one of the reasons for billionaires to exist and I'm not saying they are necessarily bad people but they are often disconnected from ground realities and don't have empathy for the masses. Kinda how people will dehumanize someone with 10X less income than us.", ">\n\nBillionaires are bad because they own the means of production and exploit the labour of everyone that works for them to a much greater extent than others. CEOs aren’t as bad, but they still exploit their employees and their class interests align with billionaires in maintaining private ownership over the means of production. \nIf a working class revolution was ever a realistic possibility, most CEOs would be on the side of capitalism against the working class. They have too much to lose.", ">\n\nYou should focus on the vehicles that make loopholes against wealth gathering such as Trusts and Board seats", ">\n\nWealth gathering only exists because private property exists. Trusts and board seats have nothing to do with it.", ">\n\nThe framing of this is a little difficult because they aren't a 1:1 comparison. \nBillionaires certainly play a role in the passive accumulation of wealth. And I'm using passive to mean, they are allocating capital, lobbying for privilege and deploy indirect power in our economy. However this is generally private, away from the public. \nCEOs are the public faces of institutions that absorb our incomes via the market and return some % of that value back to consumers via labour. Businesses are the vehicles billionaires use to extract wealth from the population. \nIt's very obvious why the public heavily focuses on the institution they have deal with face to face, for the vast majority of their lives. Marketing even reminds us they exist. Billionaires are a tiny group that are surrounded by privacy and security. I couldn't locate a billionaire if I tried but I could easily find a bank. \nThe public are angry at the highly visible vehicle of wealth inequality rather than the beneficiaries of wealth inequality that are purposely hidden.", ">\n\nLet's say we eliminate all billionaires and confiscate their entire net worth. That gives us a pool of $13.6 trillion dollars. Now in reality you could never do this since net worth doesn't transfer directly into liquid cash and if you made Jeff Bezo sell off his $90 billion worth of amazon stock all at once you wouldn't get $90 billion for it, but let's just pretend. \nSo let's take that $13.6 trillion and equally distribute it among the world population. That's $1700 a person. In the US that's less money per person than the total of what was given out by the government in the form of Covid stimulus. \nDoes this solve inequality? Obviously not. In America $1700 isn't going to make a dent in income inequality because you still have some people making 20k a year while others are making 80k and a one time injection of $1700 isn't going to change that. So if eliminating all billionaires and redistributing their wealth doesn't solve income inequality then Billionaires are not the cause. \nThe problem has a lot more to do with concentration of resources in specific countries. The bottom quartile in America live downright lavish lives compared to a Vietnamese subsistence farmer or a Guatemalan factory worker. While the subsistence farmer breaks his back 12 hours a day 7 days a week farming just enough food to get by and lives a life of hunger and malnourishment, food is so plentiful and cheap in America that for the first time in human history being overweight is correlated with being poor. American household hold over $98 trillion in wealth while only $5 trillion of that belongs to billionaires. America as a whole makes up only 4% of the world population but holds 25% of the worlds wealth.", ">\n\nIf nobody on earth had more wealth than $999,999,999.99, would income/wealth inequality still be a problem? Yes. Therefore inequality is not merely due to the existence of billionaires.", ">\n\nFinancial position of the United States \n\nThe financial position of the United States includes assets of at least $269. 6 trillion (1576% of GDP) and debts of $145. 8 trillion (852% of GDP) to produce a net worth of at least $123. 8 trillion (723% of GDP) as of Q1 2014.\n\n^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)" ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending.", ">\n\ninequality is due to money, not the owners. there is no world where the capital stabilizes all of the beholders on equal ground", ">\n\nWhile that's a good statement to make, in current scenario, it's like saying that high murder rates in Mexico isn't due to the gangs but due to guns", ">\n\nThe high murder rates in Mexico aren't due to gangs or guns, those are the symptoms, not the cause. The cause are political realities that encourage violence as an effective strategy for managing narcotics distribution, mostly the demand for drugs in the united states. If you could snap your fingers and replace every single person in mexico with people from say... finland with no other changes, you'd end up with the same drug violence after a short period of time, because people are largely the same everywhere. Systems are the only thing that really differs.\nSame goes for billionaires. They exist and are harmful because the economic system we live in allows them to. They're not uniquely bad people who just so happened to have a lot of money, and if only some other people had all that money things would be better. They're a symptom of the problem of economic policy not checking the natural tendencies of capital in a free market to flow towards an ever increasingly small number of people. I'm not saying you're wrong and that CEOs really are responsible for income inequality, but that no one group of people is. The systems we choose to put in place are to blame.", ">\n\nDefinitely, the system we have is one of the reasons for billionaires to exist and I'm not saying they are necessarily bad people but they are often disconnected from ground realities and don't have empathy for the masses. Kinda how people will dehumanize someone with 10X less income than us.", ">\n\nBillionaires are bad because they own the means of production and exploit the labour of everyone that works for them to a much greater extent than others. CEOs aren’t as bad, but they still exploit their employees and their class interests align with billionaires in maintaining private ownership over the means of production. \nIf a working class revolution was ever a realistic possibility, most CEOs would be on the side of capitalism against the working class. They have too much to lose.", ">\n\nYou should focus on the vehicles that make loopholes against wealth gathering such as Trusts and Board seats", ">\n\nWealth gathering only exists because private property exists. Trusts and board seats have nothing to do with it.", ">\n\nThe framing of this is a little difficult because they aren't a 1:1 comparison. \nBillionaires certainly play a role in the passive accumulation of wealth. And I'm using passive to mean, they are allocating capital, lobbying for privilege and deploy indirect power in our economy. However this is generally private, away from the public. \nCEOs are the public faces of institutions that absorb our incomes via the market and return some % of that value back to consumers via labour. Businesses are the vehicles billionaires use to extract wealth from the population. \nIt's very obvious why the public heavily focuses on the institution they have deal with face to face, for the vast majority of their lives. Marketing even reminds us they exist. Billionaires are a tiny group that are surrounded by privacy and security. I couldn't locate a billionaire if I tried but I could easily find a bank. \nThe public are angry at the highly visible vehicle of wealth inequality rather than the beneficiaries of wealth inequality that are purposely hidden.", ">\n\nLet's say we eliminate all billionaires and confiscate their entire net worth. That gives us a pool of $13.6 trillion dollars. Now in reality you could never do this since net worth doesn't transfer directly into liquid cash and if you made Jeff Bezo sell off his $90 billion worth of amazon stock all at once you wouldn't get $90 billion for it, but let's just pretend. \nSo let's take that $13.6 trillion and equally distribute it among the world population. That's $1700 a person. In the US that's less money per person than the total of what was given out by the government in the form of Covid stimulus. \nDoes this solve inequality? Obviously not. In America $1700 isn't going to make a dent in income inequality because you still have some people making 20k a year while others are making 80k and a one time injection of $1700 isn't going to change that. So if eliminating all billionaires and redistributing their wealth doesn't solve income inequality then Billionaires are not the cause. \nThe problem has a lot more to do with concentration of resources in specific countries. The bottom quartile in America live downright lavish lives compared to a Vietnamese subsistence farmer or a Guatemalan factory worker. While the subsistence farmer breaks his back 12 hours a day 7 days a week farming just enough food to get by and lives a life of hunger and malnourishment, food is so plentiful and cheap in America that for the first time in human history being overweight is correlated with being poor. American household hold over $98 trillion in wealth while only $5 trillion of that belongs to billionaires. America as a whole makes up only 4% of the world population but holds 25% of the worlds wealth.", ">\n\nIf nobody on earth had more wealth than $999,999,999.99, would income/wealth inequality still be a problem? Yes. Therefore inequality is not merely due to the existence of billionaires.", ">\n\nFinancial position of the United States \n\nThe financial position of the United States includes assets of at least $269. 6 trillion (1576% of GDP) and debts of $145. 8 trillion (852% of GDP) to produce a net worth of at least $123. 8 trillion (723% of GDP) as of Q1 2014.\n\n^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)", ">\n\nTo be a billionaire you don't get that way by earning a paycheck. You get that way by owning things that are valuable or increase in value. Often times these things they own also produce goods for consumers of all income levels. Is there not a good being given by building the apartment building that 100's of families live in? \nIf I buy a property, and I build on it with my own money and it becomes valuable. Am I wealthy and should pay a lot of tax becuase others have valued my property at a much higher level than what I paid? Even if that value came mostly from my own labor? It isn't worth anything until I sell it but because someone else thinks it worth a lot. I have to come up with money I don't have to pay taxes you think I owe becuase of the worth you assigned to my building. \nWho will I sell this building to? Certainly not poor people. So in order to pay the taxes you think I owe, I have to sell my building likely to someone wealthy who can afford to pay and then they will make more becuase they have the capital to pay taxes. Was that your intent?" ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending.", ">\n\ninequality is due to money, not the owners. there is no world where the capital stabilizes all of the beholders on equal ground", ">\n\nWhile that's a good statement to make, in current scenario, it's like saying that high murder rates in Mexico isn't due to the gangs but due to guns", ">\n\nThe high murder rates in Mexico aren't due to gangs or guns, those are the symptoms, not the cause. The cause are political realities that encourage violence as an effective strategy for managing narcotics distribution, mostly the demand for drugs in the united states. If you could snap your fingers and replace every single person in mexico with people from say... finland with no other changes, you'd end up with the same drug violence after a short period of time, because people are largely the same everywhere. Systems are the only thing that really differs.\nSame goes for billionaires. They exist and are harmful because the economic system we live in allows them to. They're not uniquely bad people who just so happened to have a lot of money, and if only some other people had all that money things would be better. They're a symptom of the problem of economic policy not checking the natural tendencies of capital in a free market to flow towards an ever increasingly small number of people. I'm not saying you're wrong and that CEOs really are responsible for income inequality, but that no one group of people is. The systems we choose to put in place are to blame.", ">\n\nDefinitely, the system we have is one of the reasons for billionaires to exist and I'm not saying they are necessarily bad people but they are often disconnected from ground realities and don't have empathy for the masses. Kinda how people will dehumanize someone with 10X less income than us.", ">\n\nBillionaires are bad because they own the means of production and exploit the labour of everyone that works for them to a much greater extent than others. CEOs aren’t as bad, but they still exploit their employees and their class interests align with billionaires in maintaining private ownership over the means of production. \nIf a working class revolution was ever a realistic possibility, most CEOs would be on the side of capitalism against the working class. They have too much to lose.", ">\n\nYou should focus on the vehicles that make loopholes against wealth gathering such as Trusts and Board seats", ">\n\nWealth gathering only exists because private property exists. Trusts and board seats have nothing to do with it.", ">\n\nThe framing of this is a little difficult because they aren't a 1:1 comparison. \nBillionaires certainly play a role in the passive accumulation of wealth. And I'm using passive to mean, they are allocating capital, lobbying for privilege and deploy indirect power in our economy. However this is generally private, away from the public. \nCEOs are the public faces of institutions that absorb our incomes via the market and return some % of that value back to consumers via labour. Businesses are the vehicles billionaires use to extract wealth from the population. \nIt's very obvious why the public heavily focuses on the institution they have deal with face to face, for the vast majority of their lives. Marketing even reminds us they exist. Billionaires are a tiny group that are surrounded by privacy and security. I couldn't locate a billionaire if I tried but I could easily find a bank. \nThe public are angry at the highly visible vehicle of wealth inequality rather than the beneficiaries of wealth inequality that are purposely hidden.", ">\n\nLet's say we eliminate all billionaires and confiscate their entire net worth. That gives us a pool of $13.6 trillion dollars. Now in reality you could never do this since net worth doesn't transfer directly into liquid cash and if you made Jeff Bezo sell off his $90 billion worth of amazon stock all at once you wouldn't get $90 billion for it, but let's just pretend. \nSo let's take that $13.6 trillion and equally distribute it among the world population. That's $1700 a person. In the US that's less money per person than the total of what was given out by the government in the form of Covid stimulus. \nDoes this solve inequality? Obviously not. In America $1700 isn't going to make a dent in income inequality because you still have some people making 20k a year while others are making 80k and a one time injection of $1700 isn't going to change that. So if eliminating all billionaires and redistributing their wealth doesn't solve income inequality then Billionaires are not the cause. \nThe problem has a lot more to do with concentration of resources in specific countries. The bottom quartile in America live downright lavish lives compared to a Vietnamese subsistence farmer or a Guatemalan factory worker. While the subsistence farmer breaks his back 12 hours a day 7 days a week farming just enough food to get by and lives a life of hunger and malnourishment, food is so plentiful and cheap in America that for the first time in human history being overweight is correlated with being poor. American household hold over $98 trillion in wealth while only $5 trillion of that belongs to billionaires. America as a whole makes up only 4% of the world population but holds 25% of the worlds wealth.", ">\n\nIf nobody on earth had more wealth than $999,999,999.99, would income/wealth inequality still be a problem? Yes. Therefore inequality is not merely due to the existence of billionaires.", ">\n\nFinancial position of the United States \n\nThe financial position of the United States includes assets of at least $269. 6 trillion (1576% of GDP) and debts of $145. 8 trillion (852% of GDP) to produce a net worth of at least $123. 8 trillion (723% of GDP) as of Q1 2014.\n\n^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)", ">\n\nTo be a billionaire you don't get that way by earning a paycheck. You get that way by owning things that are valuable or increase in value. Often times these things they own also produce goods for consumers of all income levels. Is there not a good being given by building the apartment building that 100's of families live in? \nIf I buy a property, and I build on it with my own money and it becomes valuable. Am I wealthy and should pay a lot of tax becuase others have valued my property at a much higher level than what I paid? Even if that value came mostly from my own labor? It isn't worth anything until I sell it but because someone else thinks it worth a lot. I have to come up with money I don't have to pay taxes you think I owe becuase of the worth you assigned to my building. \nWho will I sell this building to? Certainly not poor people. So in order to pay the taxes you think I owe, I have to sell my building likely to someone wealthy who can afford to pay and then they will make more becuase they have the capital to pay taxes. Was that your intent?", ">\n\nSo to preface this I'll state up front that I have no love for billionaires or the wealthy elite class, but simply pointing to a singular group of people such as \"billionaires\" or \" CEOs\" and blaming them for all of our woes seems short sighted. You are on the right path, but billionaires are just a symptom, not the cause. The real culprit to blame for issues such as wealth inequality would be the system that allows individuals to amass that kind of wealth to begin with. \nBecause the majority of wealth is not hoarded by individuals, most of it is tied up in mega corporations whose goal is to try and squeeze as much wealth out of the pockets of working class people as possible to chase the dragon of higher and higher profits. And while it is true that at the top of these corporate chains are the billionaires and CEOs you mentioned, there has to be a corporation and system to prop up said corporation to allow them to pursue their greed." ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending.", ">\n\ninequality is due to money, not the owners. there is no world where the capital stabilizes all of the beholders on equal ground", ">\n\nWhile that's a good statement to make, in current scenario, it's like saying that high murder rates in Mexico isn't due to the gangs but due to guns", ">\n\nThe high murder rates in Mexico aren't due to gangs or guns, those are the symptoms, not the cause. The cause are political realities that encourage violence as an effective strategy for managing narcotics distribution, mostly the demand for drugs in the united states. If you could snap your fingers and replace every single person in mexico with people from say... finland with no other changes, you'd end up with the same drug violence after a short period of time, because people are largely the same everywhere. Systems are the only thing that really differs.\nSame goes for billionaires. They exist and are harmful because the economic system we live in allows them to. They're not uniquely bad people who just so happened to have a lot of money, and if only some other people had all that money things would be better. They're a symptom of the problem of economic policy not checking the natural tendencies of capital in a free market to flow towards an ever increasingly small number of people. I'm not saying you're wrong and that CEOs really are responsible for income inequality, but that no one group of people is. The systems we choose to put in place are to blame.", ">\n\nDefinitely, the system we have is one of the reasons for billionaires to exist and I'm not saying they are necessarily bad people but they are often disconnected from ground realities and don't have empathy for the masses. Kinda how people will dehumanize someone with 10X less income than us.", ">\n\nBillionaires are bad because they own the means of production and exploit the labour of everyone that works for them to a much greater extent than others. CEOs aren’t as bad, but they still exploit their employees and their class interests align with billionaires in maintaining private ownership over the means of production. \nIf a working class revolution was ever a realistic possibility, most CEOs would be on the side of capitalism against the working class. They have too much to lose.", ">\n\nYou should focus on the vehicles that make loopholes against wealth gathering such as Trusts and Board seats", ">\n\nWealth gathering only exists because private property exists. Trusts and board seats have nothing to do with it.", ">\n\nThe framing of this is a little difficult because they aren't a 1:1 comparison. \nBillionaires certainly play a role in the passive accumulation of wealth. And I'm using passive to mean, they are allocating capital, lobbying for privilege and deploy indirect power in our economy. However this is generally private, away from the public. \nCEOs are the public faces of institutions that absorb our incomes via the market and return some % of that value back to consumers via labour. Businesses are the vehicles billionaires use to extract wealth from the population. \nIt's very obvious why the public heavily focuses on the institution they have deal with face to face, for the vast majority of their lives. Marketing even reminds us they exist. Billionaires are a tiny group that are surrounded by privacy and security. I couldn't locate a billionaire if I tried but I could easily find a bank. \nThe public are angry at the highly visible vehicle of wealth inequality rather than the beneficiaries of wealth inequality that are purposely hidden.", ">\n\nLet's say we eliminate all billionaires and confiscate their entire net worth. That gives us a pool of $13.6 trillion dollars. Now in reality you could never do this since net worth doesn't transfer directly into liquid cash and if you made Jeff Bezo sell off his $90 billion worth of amazon stock all at once you wouldn't get $90 billion for it, but let's just pretend. \nSo let's take that $13.6 trillion and equally distribute it among the world population. That's $1700 a person. In the US that's less money per person than the total of what was given out by the government in the form of Covid stimulus. \nDoes this solve inequality? Obviously not. In America $1700 isn't going to make a dent in income inequality because you still have some people making 20k a year while others are making 80k and a one time injection of $1700 isn't going to change that. So if eliminating all billionaires and redistributing their wealth doesn't solve income inequality then Billionaires are not the cause. \nThe problem has a lot more to do with concentration of resources in specific countries. The bottom quartile in America live downright lavish lives compared to a Vietnamese subsistence farmer or a Guatemalan factory worker. While the subsistence farmer breaks his back 12 hours a day 7 days a week farming just enough food to get by and lives a life of hunger and malnourishment, food is so plentiful and cheap in America that for the first time in human history being overweight is correlated with being poor. American household hold over $98 trillion in wealth while only $5 trillion of that belongs to billionaires. America as a whole makes up only 4% of the world population but holds 25% of the worlds wealth.", ">\n\nIf nobody on earth had more wealth than $999,999,999.99, would income/wealth inequality still be a problem? Yes. Therefore inequality is not merely due to the existence of billionaires.", ">\n\nFinancial position of the United States \n\nThe financial position of the United States includes assets of at least $269. 6 trillion (1576% of GDP) and debts of $145. 8 trillion (852% of GDP) to produce a net worth of at least $123. 8 trillion (723% of GDP) as of Q1 2014.\n\n^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)", ">\n\nTo be a billionaire you don't get that way by earning a paycheck. You get that way by owning things that are valuable or increase in value. Often times these things they own also produce goods for consumers of all income levels. Is there not a good being given by building the apartment building that 100's of families live in? \nIf I buy a property, and I build on it with my own money and it becomes valuable. Am I wealthy and should pay a lot of tax becuase others have valued my property at a much higher level than what I paid? Even if that value came mostly from my own labor? It isn't worth anything until I sell it but because someone else thinks it worth a lot. I have to come up with money I don't have to pay taxes you think I owe becuase of the worth you assigned to my building. \nWho will I sell this building to? Certainly not poor people. So in order to pay the taxes you think I owe, I have to sell my building likely to someone wealthy who can afford to pay and then they will make more becuase they have the capital to pay taxes. Was that your intent?", ">\n\nSo to preface this I'll state up front that I have no love for billionaires or the wealthy elite class, but simply pointing to a singular group of people such as \"billionaires\" or \" CEOs\" and blaming them for all of our woes seems short sighted. You are on the right path, but billionaires are just a symptom, not the cause. The real culprit to blame for issues such as wealth inequality would be the system that allows individuals to amass that kind of wealth to begin with. \nBecause the majority of wealth is not hoarded by individuals, most of it is tied up in mega corporations whose goal is to try and squeeze as much wealth out of the pockets of working class people as possible to chase the dragon of higher and higher profits. And while it is true that at the top of these corporate chains are the billionaires and CEOs you mentioned, there has to be a corporation and system to prop up said corporation to allow them to pursue their greed.", ">\n\nThanks god someone is standing up for the poor ceos." ]

[ "Yesterday was CEO jackpot day in Belgium. Yesterday CEOs of a BEL-20 company made as much as the average Belgian does in a year src. While CEOs might not be te biggest sources of inequality if you compare them to billionaires they most certainly contribute to it.", ">\n\n\nwhen the real inequalities are due to existence of billionaires\n\nThis is wrong. Billionaires usually start with an idea. The result of the success of that idea is increasing the total wealth. They get a large cut of that increase.\nThink of the major inventions and how they made us better off. \nIt's a misconception to believe that wealth was and always has been a pie and that if someone gets more everyone else gets less.\nI'm deciding to make this short because i don't feel like writing too much but that's the simple way to put it.", ">\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth. By your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa", ">\n\n\nBillionaires don't usually increase the total size of pie or mostly invent a new thing.. They are just better at hoarding wealth.\n\nWell that's wrong but I won't respond to this.\n\nBy your logic all science Nobel prize winners should be billionaires or vice versa\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value. Nobel prize winners did nice stuff but that doesn't mean the market value of their ideas was enough to make them billionaires. Maybe just millions or hundreds of millions. Most of them are indeed very rich.\nThe world isn't black and white and saying what you said as a counter is laughably simplistic.", ">\n\n\nThe influence of the idea has a market value\n\nthe linux kernel sells for $0, and it is the most influential operating system today.\nIf market value defined influence, charging for something would make it more influential. \nThe opposite is true. The most influential ideas are often the ones collaborated on without transaction cost.\nthe world is more complicated than you're pretending.", ">\n\ninequality is due to money, not the owners. there is no world where the capital stabilizes all of the beholders on equal ground", ">\n\nWhile that's a good statement to make, in current scenario, it's like saying that high murder rates in Mexico isn't due to the gangs but due to guns", ">\n\nThe high murder rates in Mexico aren't due to gangs or guns, those are the symptoms, not the cause. The cause are political realities that encourage violence as an effective strategy for managing narcotics distribution, mostly the demand for drugs in the united states. If you could snap your fingers and replace every single person in mexico with people from say... finland with no other changes, you'd end up with the same drug violence after a short period of time, because people are largely the same everywhere. Systems are the only thing that really differs.\nSame goes for billionaires. They exist and are harmful because the economic system we live in allows them to. They're not uniquely bad people who just so happened to have a lot of money, and if only some other people had all that money things would be better. They're a symptom of the problem of economic policy not checking the natural tendencies of capital in a free market to flow towards an ever increasingly small number of people. I'm not saying you're wrong and that CEOs really are responsible for income inequality, but that no one group of people is. The systems we choose to put in place are to blame.", ">\n\nDefinitely, the system we have is one of the reasons for billionaires to exist and I'm not saying they are necessarily bad people but they are often disconnected from ground realities and don't have empathy for the masses. Kinda how people will dehumanize someone with 10X less income than us.", ">\n\nBillionaires are bad because they own the means of production and exploit the labour of everyone that works for them to a much greater extent than others. CEOs aren’t as bad, but they still exploit their employees and their class interests align with billionaires in maintaining private ownership over the means of production. \nIf a working class revolution was ever a realistic possibility, most CEOs would be on the side of capitalism against the working class. They have too much to lose.", ">\n\nYou should focus on the vehicles that make loopholes against wealth gathering such as Trusts and Board seats", ">\n\nWealth gathering only exists because private property exists. Trusts and board seats have nothing to do with it.", ">\n\nThe framing of this is a little difficult because they aren't a 1:1 comparison. \nBillionaires certainly play a role in the passive accumulation of wealth. And I'm using passive to mean, they are allocating capital, lobbying for privilege and deploy indirect power in our economy. However this is generally private, away from the public. \nCEOs are the public faces of institutions that absorb our incomes via the market and return some % of that value back to consumers via labour. Businesses are the vehicles billionaires use to extract wealth from the population. \nIt's very obvious why the public heavily focuses on the institution they have deal with face to face, for the vast majority of their lives. Marketing even reminds us they exist. Billionaires are a tiny group that are surrounded by privacy and security. I couldn't locate a billionaire if I tried but I could easily find a bank. \nThe public are angry at the highly visible vehicle of wealth inequality rather than the beneficiaries of wealth inequality that are purposely hidden.", ">\n\nLet's say we eliminate all billionaires and confiscate their entire net worth. That gives us a pool of $13.6 trillion dollars. Now in reality you could never do this since net worth doesn't transfer directly into liquid cash and if you made Jeff Bezo sell off his $90 billion worth of amazon stock all at once you wouldn't get $90 billion for it, but let's just pretend. \nSo let's take that $13.6 trillion and equally distribute it among the world population. That's $1700 a person. In the US that's less money per person than the total of what was given out by the government in the form of Covid stimulus. \nDoes this solve inequality? Obviously not. In America $1700 isn't going to make a dent in income inequality because you still have some people making 20k a year while others are making 80k and a one time injection of $1700 isn't going to change that. So if eliminating all billionaires and redistributing their wealth doesn't solve income inequality then Billionaires are not the cause. \nThe problem has a lot more to do with concentration of resources in specific countries. The bottom quartile in America live downright lavish lives compared to a Vietnamese subsistence farmer or a Guatemalan factory worker. While the subsistence farmer breaks his back 12 hours a day 7 days a week farming just enough food to get by and lives a life of hunger and malnourishment, food is so plentiful and cheap in America that for the first time in human history being overweight is correlated with being poor. American household hold over $98 trillion in wealth while only $5 trillion of that belongs to billionaires. America as a whole makes up only 4% of the world population but holds 25% of the worlds wealth.", ">\n\nIf nobody on earth had more wealth than $999,999,999.99, would income/wealth inequality still be a problem? Yes. Therefore inequality is not merely due to the existence of billionaires.", ">\n\nFinancial position of the United States \n\nThe financial position of the United States includes assets of at least $269. 6 trillion (1576% of GDP) and debts of $145. 8 trillion (852% of GDP) to produce a net worth of at least $123. 8 trillion (723% of GDP) as of Q1 2014.\n\n^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)", ">\n\nTo be a billionaire you don't get that way by earning a paycheck. You get that way by owning things that are valuable or increase in value. Often times these things they own also produce goods for consumers of all income levels. Is there not a good being given by building the apartment building that 100's of families live in? \nIf I buy a property, and I build on it with my own money and it becomes valuable. Am I wealthy and should pay a lot of tax becuase others have valued my property at a much higher level than what I paid? Even if that value came mostly from my own labor? It isn't worth anything until I sell it but because someone else thinks it worth a lot. I have to come up with money I don't have to pay taxes you think I owe becuase of the worth you assigned to my building. \nWho will I sell this building to? Certainly not poor people. So in order to pay the taxes you think I owe, I have to sell my building likely to someone wealthy who can afford to pay and then they will make more becuase they have the capital to pay taxes. Was that your intent?", ">\n\nSo to preface this I'll state up front that I have no love for billionaires or the wealthy elite class, but simply pointing to a singular group of people such as \"billionaires\" or \" CEOs\" and blaming them for all of our woes seems short sighted. You are on the right path, but billionaires are just a symptom, not the cause. The real culprit to blame for issues such as wealth inequality would be the system that allows individuals to amass that kind of wealth to begin with. \nBecause the majority of wealth is not hoarded by individuals, most of it is tied up in mega corporations whose goal is to try and squeeze as much wealth out of the pockets of working class people as possible to chase the dragon of higher and higher profits. And while it is true that at the top of these corporate chains are the billionaires and CEOs you mentioned, there has to be a corporation and system to prop up said corporation to allow them to pursue their greed.", ">\n\nThanks god someone is standing up for the poor ceos.", ">\n\nHow does the existence of Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk cause my life to be any less good than it would be if they weren’t there? Considering my last two car purchases were both Teslas and I get packages from Amazon delivered almost every day of the week except sunday, their products and services are a big part of my life. Their wealth is due to investors bidding up the shares of the companies they own millions of shares of. I don’t really see what the viable alternative is. If I own a million shares of my company and the market says those shares are worth 1,000 bucks apiece, I’m a billionaire. It’s all consensual. The investor says they are willing to exchange their money for shares in the company. The company’s shares are owned by that person. What’s the problem, here? If Amazon stock goes up and Bezos’ net worth increases by 10 billion dollars, it’s not like we have 10 billion fewer dollars. If anything, a lot of us got proportionately richer since we own amazon stock, too" ]

[]

[ "“Missed me.”" ]

[ "“Missed me.”", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 72%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nBogotá - Colombian Vice President Francia Marquez said Tuesday that her security detail had foiled an attempt to assassinate her.\nMarquez, the first black vice president in the South American country, said on Twitter that her security people had carried out \"The deactivation and destruction of a high-capacity explosive device\" in the road leading to her family home in Colombia's southwest.\nHer security team discovered the bag after being alerted to suspicious behavior by \"Outside elements\" along the road leading to the village of Yolombo in the Suarez municipality where Marquez was born.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Marquez^#1 security^#2 attempt^#3 Petro^#4 President^#5" ]

[]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end." ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew.." ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room." ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?", ">\n\nIt's delicious food" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?", ">\n\nIt's delicious food", ">\n\nMaybe get them a bowl that slows down eating. AliExpress for “anti choking bowl”, choose smaller sizes for cats." ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?", ">\n\nIt's delicious food", ">\n\nMaybe get them a bowl that slows down eating. AliExpress for “anti choking bowl”, choose smaller sizes for cats.", ">\n\nIS that poop or vomit, I dont understand, someone said its from a cat" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?", ">\n\nIt's delicious food", ">\n\nMaybe get them a bowl that slows down eating. AliExpress for “anti choking bowl”, choose smaller sizes for cats.", ">\n\nIS that poop or vomit, I dont understand, someone said its from a cat", ">\n\nOh that sucks" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?", ">\n\nIt's delicious food", ">\n\nMaybe get them a bowl that slows down eating. AliExpress for “anti choking bowl”, choose smaller sizes for cats.", ">\n\nIS that poop or vomit, I dont understand, someone said its from a cat", ">\n\nOh that sucks", ">\n\nI feel betrayed" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?", ">\n\nIt's delicious food", ">\n\nMaybe get them a bowl that slows down eating. AliExpress for “anti choking bowl”, choose smaller sizes for cats.", ">\n\nIS that poop or vomit, I dont understand, someone said its from a cat", ">\n\nOh that sucks", ">\n\nI feel betrayed", ">\n\nlol oh man, welcome to the club!" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?", ">\n\nIt's delicious food", ">\n\nMaybe get them a bowl that slows down eating. AliExpress for “anti choking bowl”, choose smaller sizes for cats.", ">\n\nIS that poop or vomit, I dont understand, someone said its from a cat", ">\n\nOh that sucks", ">\n\nI feel betrayed", ">\n\nlol oh man, welcome to the club!", ">\n\nOoh. Kopi luwak." ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?", ">\n\nIt's delicious food", ">\n\nMaybe get them a bowl that slows down eating. AliExpress for “anti choking bowl”, choose smaller sizes for cats.", ">\n\nIS that poop or vomit, I dont understand, someone said its from a cat", ">\n\nOh that sucks", ">\n\nI feel betrayed", ">\n\nlol oh man, welcome to the club!", ">\n\nOoh. Kopi luwak.", ">\n\nWho’s PAYDAY bar is that?" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?", ">\n\nIt's delicious food", ">\n\nMaybe get them a bowl that slows down eating. AliExpress for “anti choking bowl”, choose smaller sizes for cats.", ">\n\nIS that poop or vomit, I dont understand, someone said its from a cat", ">\n\nOh that sucks", ">\n\nI feel betrayed", ">\n\nlol oh man, welcome to the club!", ">\n\nOoh. Kopi luwak.", ">\n\nWho’s PAYDAY bar is that?", ">\n\nBlur the photo man" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?", ">\n\nIt's delicious food", ">\n\nMaybe get them a bowl that slows down eating. AliExpress for “anti choking bowl”, choose smaller sizes for cats.", ">\n\nIS that poop or vomit, I dont understand, someone said its from a cat", ">\n\nOh that sucks", ">\n\nI feel betrayed", ">\n\nlol oh man, welcome to the club!", ">\n\nOoh. Kopi luwak.", ">\n\nWho’s PAYDAY bar is that?", ">\n\nBlur the photo man", ">\n\ndamn man that sucks :/" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?", ">\n\nIt's delicious food", ">\n\nMaybe get them a bowl that slows down eating. AliExpress for “anti choking bowl”, choose smaller sizes for cats.", ">\n\nIS that poop or vomit, I dont understand, someone said its from a cat", ">\n\nOh that sucks", ">\n\nI feel betrayed", ">\n\nlol oh man, welcome to the club!", ">\n\nOoh. Kopi luwak.", ">\n\nWho’s PAYDAY bar is that?", ">\n\nBlur the photo man", ">\n\ndamn man that sucks :/", ">\n\nI hope your cat is ok." ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?", ">\n\nIt's delicious food", ">\n\nMaybe get them a bowl that slows down eating. AliExpress for “anti choking bowl”, choose smaller sizes for cats.", ">\n\nIS that poop or vomit, I dont understand, someone said its from a cat", ">\n\nOh that sucks", ">\n\nI feel betrayed", ">\n\nlol oh man, welcome to the club!", ">\n\nOoh. Kopi luwak.", ">\n\nWho’s PAYDAY bar is that?", ">\n\nBlur the photo man", ">\n\ndamn man that sucks :/", ">\n\nI hope your cat is ok.", ">\n\nI'm so grateful I don't own a cat. \nCats are the spawn of Satan." ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?", ">\n\nIt's delicious food", ">\n\nMaybe get them a bowl that slows down eating. AliExpress for “anti choking bowl”, choose smaller sizes for cats.", ">\n\nIS that poop or vomit, I dont understand, someone said its from a cat", ">\n\nOh that sucks", ">\n\nI feel betrayed", ">\n\nlol oh man, welcome to the club!", ">\n\nOoh. Kopi luwak.", ">\n\nWho’s PAYDAY bar is that?", ">\n\nBlur the photo man", ">\n\ndamn man that sucks :/", ">\n\nI hope your cat is ok.", ">\n\nI'm so grateful I don't own a cat. \nCats are the spawn of Satan.", ">\n\nFuck cats for real" ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?", ">\n\nIt's delicious food", ">\n\nMaybe get them a bowl that slows down eating. AliExpress for “anti choking bowl”, choose smaller sizes for cats.", ">\n\nIS that poop or vomit, I dont understand, someone said its from a cat", ">\n\nOh that sucks", ">\n\nI feel betrayed", ">\n\nlol oh man, welcome to the club!", ">\n\nOoh. Kopi luwak.", ">\n\nWho’s PAYDAY bar is that?", ">\n\nBlur the photo man", ">\n\ndamn man that sucks :/", ">\n\nI hope your cat is ok.", ">\n\nI'm so grateful I don't own a cat. \nCats are the spawn of Satan.", ">\n\nFuck cats for real", ">\n\nJesus." ]

[ "Cat vomit mmm like a corn dog from hell", ">\n\nOh, thank God. I thought it came out the other end.", ">\n\nI tought it was a chicken tender untill i read the comment's", ">\n\nI thought it was like a nutty protein bar 😂😂", ">\n\nHow brave are you feeling?", ">\n\nThought it was a salted nut roll lol", ">\n\nMight want to teach that cat to chew..", ">\n\nCats don’t chew", ">\n\nI laughed because this is my life too, buddy. I feel your pain. I've attained an almost super-human-like reflex during sleep when I hear one of them read to spew; and can somehow wake up instantaneously and yeet them across the room before they paint my keys. (No, I don't actually throw them)", ">\n\nOh how I know all about this. My cat threw up all over my Godspeed 75. From that moment on, she was banned from the room.", ">\n\nOh yeah. My cat is not allowed in my computer room with all my keyboards unless I'm there too lol", ">\n\nDoes your cat even chew?", ">\n\nIt's delicious food", ">\n\nMaybe get them a bowl that slows down eating. AliExpress for “anti choking bowl”, choose smaller sizes for cats.", ">\n\nIS that poop or vomit, I dont understand, someone said its from a cat", ">\n\nOh that sucks", ">\n\nI feel betrayed", ">\n\nlol oh man, welcome to the club!", ">\n\nOoh. Kopi luwak.", ">\n\nWho’s PAYDAY bar is that?", ">\n\nBlur the photo man", ">\n\ndamn man that sucks :/", ">\n\nI hope your cat is ok.", ">\n\nI'm so grateful I don't own a cat. \nCats are the spawn of Satan.", ">\n\nFuck cats for real", ">\n\nJesus.", ">\n\nr/fuckyouinparticular" ]

[]

[ "General-of-the-Month Club Winner!" ]

[ "General-of-the-Month Club Winner!", ">\n\n\nRussia has appointed Colonel-General Alexander Lapin as chief of staff of the country's ground forces, state-owned news agency TASS reported on Tuesday, despite fierce criticism from leading hawks over his performance in Ukraine.\nLapin, previously commander of Russia's central military district, was blasted last October by hawkish allies of President Vladimir Putin after Russian forces were driven out of the city of Lyman in eastern Ukraine, a key logistics hub.\n\n...\n\nAfter Russia lost Lyman in October, Lapin drew savage public criticism from Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov and Yevgeny Prigozhin, founder of the Wagner private military group, who have both sent units to Ukraine to bolster the efforts of the regular army.\nKadyrov said Lapin should be stripped of his medals and sent to the front with a gun to wash away his shame with blood.\nPrigozhin backed Kadyrov's comments, saying: \"All these bastards should be sent barefoot to the front with automatic guns.\"" ]

[]

[ "This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.\nRemember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not \"thoughts had in the shower!\"\n(For an explanation of what a \"showerthought\" is, please read this page.)\nRule-breaking posts may result in bans." ]

[]

[ "\"If we're forced to face consequences for our illegal actions, it'll only hurt the consumer.\"\nSounds like every other multi-billion $ monopoly's excuses." ]

[]

[ "Scum." ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af." ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af.", ">\n\nWere locking up the wrong drug dealers" ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af.", ">\n\nWere locking up the wrong drug dealers", ">\n\nHonestly, I doubt the existence of a soul, but I can at least rest assured that, no matter what, I have more of one than this sack of shit." ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af.", ">\n\nWere locking up the wrong drug dealers", ">\n\nHonestly, I doubt the existence of a soul, but I can at least rest assured that, no matter what, I have more of one than this sack of shit.", ">\n\nCorporate greed at its best. Of course this will make them darlings for Wall Street" ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af.", ">\n\nWere locking up the wrong drug dealers", ">\n\nHonestly, I doubt the existence of a soul, but I can at least rest assured that, no matter what, I have more of one than this sack of shit.", ">\n\nCorporate greed at its best. Of course this will make them darlings for Wall Street", ">\n\nWhatever, greedy bastards" ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af.", ">\n\nWere locking up the wrong drug dealers", ">\n\nHonestly, I doubt the existence of a soul, but I can at least rest assured that, no matter what, I have more of one than this sack of shit.", ">\n\nCorporate greed at its best. Of course this will make them darlings for Wall Street", ">\n\nWhatever, greedy bastards", ">\n\nCEOs are a national security threat. Nationalize production of medical products and services. I don't want to hear about \"but government bad!\", at least we have some power to influence incompetent government entities, private companies will watch us burn for fun." ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af.", ">\n\nWere locking up the wrong drug dealers", ">\n\nHonestly, I doubt the existence of a soul, but I can at least rest assured that, no matter what, I have more of one than this sack of shit.", ">\n\nCorporate greed at its best. Of course this will make them darlings for Wall Street", ">\n\nWhatever, greedy bastards", ">\n\nCEOs are a national security threat. Nationalize production of medical products and services. I don't want to hear about \"but government bad!\", at least we have some power to influence incompetent government entities, private companies will watch us burn for fun.", ">\n\n*International security threat\nWe already paid for the vaccine to be developed. We should be shipping that stuff all over the world to every nation that will take it for the lowest cost manageable. \nThe fewer people getting and staying infected, the fewer variants we have to deal with in the future.\nNot to mention that talking about value in this article makes it seem like healthcare is a free market. Asking someone how much they're willing to pay to skip a round of Russian Roulette isn't a free market activity, it's extortion." ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af.", ">\n\nWere locking up the wrong drug dealers", ">\n\nHonestly, I doubt the existence of a soul, but I can at least rest assured that, no matter what, I have more of one than this sack of shit.", ">\n\nCorporate greed at its best. Of course this will make them darlings for Wall Street", ">\n\nWhatever, greedy bastards", ">\n\nCEOs are a national security threat. Nationalize production of medical products and services. I don't want to hear about \"but government bad!\", at least we have some power to influence incompetent government entities, private companies will watch us burn for fun.", ">\n\n*International security threat\nWe already paid for the vaccine to be developed. We should be shipping that stuff all over the world to every nation that will take it for the lowest cost manageable. \nThe fewer people getting and staying infected, the fewer variants we have to deal with in the future.\nNot to mention that talking about value in this article makes it seem like healthcare is a free market. Asking someone how much they're willing to pay to skip a round of Russian Roulette isn't a free market activity, it's extortion.", ">\n\nPowerful, well said, I completely agree!" ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af.", ">\n\nWere locking up the wrong drug dealers", ">\n\nHonestly, I doubt the existence of a soul, but I can at least rest assured that, no matter what, I have more of one than this sack of shit.", ">\n\nCorporate greed at its best. Of course this will make them darlings for Wall Street", ">\n\nWhatever, greedy bastards", ">\n\nCEOs are a national security threat. Nationalize production of medical products and services. I don't want to hear about \"but government bad!\", at least we have some power to influence incompetent government entities, private companies will watch us burn for fun.", ">\n\n*International security threat\nWe already paid for the vaccine to be developed. We should be shipping that stuff all over the world to every nation that will take it for the lowest cost manageable. \nThe fewer people getting and staying infected, the fewer variants we have to deal with in the future.\nNot to mention that talking about value in this article makes it seem like healthcare is a free market. Asking someone how much they're willing to pay to skip a round of Russian Roulette isn't a free market activity, it's extortion.", ">\n\nPowerful, well said, I completely agree!", ">\n\nYou seem to value your life very highly. Therefore, we've decided to charge you as much as we can for you to keep living it." ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af.", ">\n\nWere locking up the wrong drug dealers", ">\n\nHonestly, I doubt the existence of a soul, but I can at least rest assured that, no matter what, I have more of one than this sack of shit.", ">\n\nCorporate greed at its best. Of course this will make them darlings for Wall Street", ">\n\nWhatever, greedy bastards", ">\n\nCEOs are a national security threat. Nationalize production of medical products and services. I don't want to hear about \"but government bad!\", at least we have some power to influence incompetent government entities, private companies will watch us burn for fun.", ">\n\n*International security threat\nWe already paid for the vaccine to be developed. We should be shipping that stuff all over the world to every nation that will take it for the lowest cost manageable. \nThe fewer people getting and staying infected, the fewer variants we have to deal with in the future.\nNot to mention that talking about value in this article makes it seem like healthcare is a free market. Asking someone how much they're willing to pay to skip a round of Russian Roulette isn't a free market activity, it's extortion.", ">\n\nPowerful, well said, I completely agree!", ">\n\nYou seem to value your life very highly. Therefore, we've decided to charge you as much as we can for you to keep living it.", ">\n\nThe heads of these drug companies should be in jail for withholding the vaccine formula that they didn't spend a dime to produce." ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af.", ">\n\nWere locking up the wrong drug dealers", ">\n\nHonestly, I doubt the existence of a soul, but I can at least rest assured that, no matter what, I have more of one than this sack of shit.", ">\n\nCorporate greed at its best. Of course this will make them darlings for Wall Street", ">\n\nWhatever, greedy bastards", ">\n\nCEOs are a national security threat. Nationalize production of medical products and services. I don't want to hear about \"but government bad!\", at least we have some power to influence incompetent government entities, private companies will watch us burn for fun.", ">\n\n*International security threat\nWe already paid for the vaccine to be developed. We should be shipping that stuff all over the world to every nation that will take it for the lowest cost manageable. \nThe fewer people getting and staying infected, the fewer variants we have to deal with in the future.\nNot to mention that talking about value in this article makes it seem like healthcare is a free market. Asking someone how much they're willing to pay to skip a round of Russian Roulette isn't a free market activity, it's extortion.", ">\n\nPowerful, well said, I completely agree!", ">\n\nYou seem to value your life very highly. Therefore, we've decided to charge you as much as we can for you to keep living it.", ">\n\nThe heads of these drug companies should be in jail for withholding the vaccine formula that they didn't spend a dime to produce.", ">\n\nPOS. may the CEO die a horrible novel death" ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af.", ">\n\nWere locking up the wrong drug dealers", ">\n\nHonestly, I doubt the existence of a soul, but I can at least rest assured that, no matter what, I have more of one than this sack of shit.", ">\n\nCorporate greed at its best. Of course this will make them darlings for Wall Street", ">\n\nWhatever, greedy bastards", ">\n\nCEOs are a national security threat. Nationalize production of medical products and services. I don't want to hear about \"but government bad!\", at least we have some power to influence incompetent government entities, private companies will watch us burn for fun.", ">\n\n*International security threat\nWe already paid for the vaccine to be developed. We should be shipping that stuff all over the world to every nation that will take it for the lowest cost manageable. \nThe fewer people getting and staying infected, the fewer variants we have to deal with in the future.\nNot to mention that talking about value in this article makes it seem like healthcare is a free market. Asking someone how much they're willing to pay to skip a round of Russian Roulette isn't a free market activity, it's extortion.", ">\n\nPowerful, well said, I completely agree!", ">\n\nYou seem to value your life very highly. Therefore, we've decided to charge you as much as we can for you to keep living it.", ">\n\nThe heads of these drug companies should be in jail for withholding the vaccine formula that they didn't spend a dime to produce.", ">\n\nPOS. may the CEO die a horrible novel death", ">\n\nAnd we're supposed to trust these people" ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af.", ">\n\nWere locking up the wrong drug dealers", ">\n\nHonestly, I doubt the existence of a soul, but I can at least rest assured that, no matter what, I have more of one than this sack of shit.", ">\n\nCorporate greed at its best. Of course this will make them darlings for Wall Street", ">\n\nWhatever, greedy bastards", ">\n\nCEOs are a national security threat. Nationalize production of medical products and services. I don't want to hear about \"but government bad!\", at least we have some power to influence incompetent government entities, private companies will watch us burn for fun.", ">\n\n*International security threat\nWe already paid for the vaccine to be developed. We should be shipping that stuff all over the world to every nation that will take it for the lowest cost manageable. \nThe fewer people getting and staying infected, the fewer variants we have to deal with in the future.\nNot to mention that talking about value in this article makes it seem like healthcare is a free market. Asking someone how much they're willing to pay to skip a round of Russian Roulette isn't a free market activity, it's extortion.", ">\n\nPowerful, well said, I completely agree!", ">\n\nYou seem to value your life very highly. Therefore, we've decided to charge you as much as we can for you to keep living it.", ">\n\nThe heads of these drug companies should be in jail for withholding the vaccine formula that they didn't spend a dime to produce.", ">\n\nPOS. may the CEO die a horrible novel death", ">\n\nAnd we're supposed to trust these people", ">\n\nThis guy has completely misjudged the value of his product." ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af.", ">\n\nWere locking up the wrong drug dealers", ">\n\nHonestly, I doubt the existence of a soul, but I can at least rest assured that, no matter what, I have more of one than this sack of shit.", ">\n\nCorporate greed at its best. Of course this will make them darlings for Wall Street", ">\n\nWhatever, greedy bastards", ">\n\nCEOs are a national security threat. Nationalize production of medical products and services. I don't want to hear about \"but government bad!\", at least we have some power to influence incompetent government entities, private companies will watch us burn for fun.", ">\n\n*International security threat\nWe already paid for the vaccine to be developed. We should be shipping that stuff all over the world to every nation that will take it for the lowest cost manageable. \nThe fewer people getting and staying infected, the fewer variants we have to deal with in the future.\nNot to mention that talking about value in this article makes it seem like healthcare is a free market. Asking someone how much they're willing to pay to skip a round of Russian Roulette isn't a free market activity, it's extortion.", ">\n\nPowerful, well said, I completely agree!", ">\n\nYou seem to value your life very highly. Therefore, we've decided to charge you as much as we can for you to keep living it.", ">\n\nThe heads of these drug companies should be in jail for withholding the vaccine formula that they didn't spend a dime to produce.", ">\n\nPOS. may the CEO die a horrible novel death", ">\n\nAnd we're supposed to trust these people", ">\n\nThis guy has completely misjudged the value of his product.", ">\n\nI wonder what Dolly Parton thinks about this" ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af.", ">\n\nWere locking up the wrong drug dealers", ">\n\nHonestly, I doubt the existence of a soul, but I can at least rest assured that, no matter what, I have more of one than this sack of shit.", ">\n\nCorporate greed at its best. Of course this will make them darlings for Wall Street", ">\n\nWhatever, greedy bastards", ">\n\nCEOs are a national security threat. Nationalize production of medical products and services. I don't want to hear about \"but government bad!\", at least we have some power to influence incompetent government entities, private companies will watch us burn for fun.", ">\n\n*International security threat\nWe already paid for the vaccine to be developed. We should be shipping that stuff all over the world to every nation that will take it for the lowest cost manageable. \nThe fewer people getting and staying infected, the fewer variants we have to deal with in the future.\nNot to mention that talking about value in this article makes it seem like healthcare is a free market. Asking someone how much they're willing to pay to skip a round of Russian Roulette isn't a free market activity, it's extortion.", ">\n\nPowerful, well said, I completely agree!", ">\n\nYou seem to value your life very highly. Therefore, we've decided to charge you as much as we can for you to keep living it.", ">\n\nThe heads of these drug companies should be in jail for withholding the vaccine formula that they didn't spend a dime to produce.", ">\n\nPOS. may the CEO die a horrible novel death", ">\n\nAnd we're supposed to trust these people", ">\n\nThis guy has completely misjudged the value of his product.", ">\n\nI wonder what Dolly Parton thinks about this", ">\n\nDoes anyone use moderna seems to all be psyher in the uk, even j&j seem to have gone back to shampoo" ]

[ "Scum.", ">\n\nModerna has $18B in cash and cash equivalents and is raising 4x the price of a drug whose research was largely funded by tax paying american citizens and whose production cost is minimal. Yeahhhh, even as a capitalist this is greedy af.", ">\n\nWere locking up the wrong drug dealers", ">\n\nHonestly, I doubt the existence of a soul, but I can at least rest assured that, no matter what, I have more of one than this sack of shit.", ">\n\nCorporate greed at its best. Of course this will make them darlings for Wall Street", ">\n\nWhatever, greedy bastards", ">\n\nCEOs are a national security threat. Nationalize production of medical products and services. I don't want to hear about \"but government bad!\", at least we have some power to influence incompetent government entities, private companies will watch us burn for fun.", ">\n\n*International security threat\nWe already paid for the vaccine to be developed. We should be shipping that stuff all over the world to every nation that will take it for the lowest cost manageable. \nThe fewer people getting and staying infected, the fewer variants we have to deal with in the future.\nNot to mention that talking about value in this article makes it seem like healthcare is a free market. Asking someone how much they're willing to pay to skip a round of Russian Roulette isn't a free market activity, it's extortion.", ">\n\nPowerful, well said, I completely agree!", ">\n\nYou seem to value your life very highly. Therefore, we've decided to charge you as much as we can for you to keep living it.", ">\n\nThe heads of these drug companies should be in jail for withholding the vaccine formula that they didn't spend a dime to produce.", ">\n\nPOS. may the CEO die a horrible novel death", ">\n\nAnd we're supposed to trust these people", ">\n\nThis guy has completely misjudged the value of his product.", ">\n\nI wonder what Dolly Parton thinks about this", ">\n\nDoes anyone use moderna seems to all be psyher in the uk, even j&j seem to have gone back to shampoo", ">\n\nSure seemed to enjoy the nearly $2 billion the US gave to accelerate the development of the vaccine. This must be icing on the cake for them..." ]

[]

[ "Bro.. its background music. It isn't supposed to be groundbreaking original music. People use it for studying, Cafe background music, while cleaning the house, etc..." ]

[ "Bro.. its background music. It isn't supposed to be groundbreaking original music. People use it for studying, Cafe background music, while cleaning the house, etc...", ">\n\nI think people are realising that it is a cheap and lazy thing to do." ]

[ "Bro.. its background music. It isn't supposed to be groundbreaking original music. People use it for studying, Cafe background music, while cleaning the house, etc...", ">\n\nI think people are realising that it is a cheap and lazy thing to do.", ">\n\n\nand they are very much different from what the original music was supposed to be.\n\nHow to say \"I don't understand the concept of covers\" without actually saying it .." ]

[ "Bro.. its background music. It isn't supposed to be groundbreaking original music. People use it for studying, Cafe background music, while cleaning the house, etc...", ">\n\nI think people are realising that it is a cheap and lazy thing to do.", ">\n\n\nand they are very much different from what the original music was supposed to be.\n\nHow to say \"I don't understand the concept of covers\" without actually saying it ..", ">\n\nI know what a cover is. I also love when an artist put their own style and soul into a cover but Lo-Fi seems like low effort generic bullshit." ]

[ "Bro.. its background music. It isn't supposed to be groundbreaking original music. People use it for studying, Cafe background music, while cleaning the house, etc...", ">\n\nI think people are realising that it is a cheap and lazy thing to do.", ">\n\n\nand they are very much different from what the original music was supposed to be.\n\nHow to say \"I don't understand the concept of covers\" without actually saying it ..", ">\n\nI know what a cover is. I also love when an artist put their own style and soul into a cover but Lo-Fi seems like low effort generic bullshit.", ">\n\nJave you heard about nightcore?" ]

[ "Bro.. its background music. It isn't supposed to be groundbreaking original music. People use it for studying, Cafe background music, while cleaning the house, etc...", ">\n\nI think people are realising that it is a cheap and lazy thing to do.", ">\n\n\nand they are very much different from what the original music was supposed to be.\n\nHow to say \"I don't understand the concept of covers\" without actually saying it ..", ">\n\nI know what a cover is. I also love when an artist put their own style and soul into a cover but Lo-Fi seems like low effort generic bullshit.", ">\n\nJave you heard about nightcore?", ">\n\nYou gotta give the majority of unoriginal ‘artists’ some credit, what else would they be capable of doing?" ]

[ "Bro.. its background music. It isn't supposed to be groundbreaking original music. People use it for studying, Cafe background music, while cleaning the house, etc...", ">\n\nI think people are realising that it is a cheap and lazy thing to do.", ">\n\n\nand they are very much different from what the original music was supposed to be.\n\nHow to say \"I don't understand the concept of covers\" without actually saying it ..", ">\n\nI know what a cover is. I also love when an artist put their own style and soul into a cover but Lo-Fi seems like low effort generic bullshit.", ">\n\nJave you heard about nightcore?", ">\n\nYou gotta give the majority of unoriginal ‘artists’ some credit, what else would they be capable of doing?", ">\n\nAs someone who somewhat enjoys lofi, I've never actually heard a \"cover\" from a lofi artist. Covers in general are never very good anyways, I think that's what you're really complaining about" ]

[ "Bro.. its background music. It isn't supposed to be groundbreaking original music. People use it for studying, Cafe background music, while cleaning the house, etc...", ">\n\nI think people are realising that it is a cheap and lazy thing to do.", ">\n\n\nand they are very much different from what the original music was supposed to be.\n\nHow to say \"I don't understand the concept of covers\" without actually saying it ..", ">\n\nI know what a cover is. I also love when an artist put their own style and soul into a cover but Lo-Fi seems like low effort generic bullshit.", ">\n\nJave you heard about nightcore?", ">\n\nYou gotta give the majority of unoriginal ‘artists’ some credit, what else would they be capable of doing?", ">\n\nAs someone who somewhat enjoys lofi, I've never actually heard a \"cover\" from a lofi artist. Covers in general are never very good anyways, I think that's what you're really complaining about", ">\n\nyeah and also: If you just take an existing song and make it slower or faster, youre not a musician. Youre not even a DJ. I know you want to think that you are, but youre not." ]

[ "Bro.. its background music. It isn't supposed to be groundbreaking original music. People use it for studying, Cafe background music, while cleaning the house, etc...", ">\n\nI think people are realising that it is a cheap and lazy thing to do.", ">\n\n\nand they are very much different from what the original music was supposed to be.\n\nHow to say \"I don't understand the concept of covers\" without actually saying it ..", ">\n\nI know what a cover is. I also love when an artist put their own style and soul into a cover but Lo-Fi seems like low effort generic bullshit.", ">\n\nJave you heard about nightcore?", ">\n\nYou gotta give the majority of unoriginal ‘artists’ some credit, what else would they be capable of doing?", ">\n\nAs someone who somewhat enjoys lofi, I've never actually heard a \"cover\" from a lofi artist. Covers in general are never very good anyways, I think that's what you're really complaining about", ">\n\nyeah and also: If you just take an existing song and make it slower or faster, youre not a musician. Youre not even a DJ. I know you want to think that you are, but youre not.", ">\n\nI think you are missing the point of the music. Might as well say instrumental music needs more lyrics." ]

[ "Bro.. its background music. It isn't supposed to be groundbreaking original music. People use it for studying, Cafe background music, while cleaning the house, etc...", ">\n\nI think people are realising that it is a cheap and lazy thing to do.", ">\n\n\nand they are very much different from what the original music was supposed to be.\n\nHow to say \"I don't understand the concept of covers\" without actually saying it ..", ">\n\nI know what a cover is. I also love when an artist put their own style and soul into a cover but Lo-Fi seems like low effort generic bullshit.", ">\n\nJave you heard about nightcore?", ">\n\nYou gotta give the majority of unoriginal ‘artists’ some credit, what else would they be capable of doing?", ">\n\nAs someone who somewhat enjoys lofi, I've never actually heard a \"cover\" from a lofi artist. Covers in general are never very good anyways, I think that's what you're really complaining about", ">\n\nyeah and also: If you just take an existing song and make it slower or faster, youre not a musician. Youre not even a DJ. I know you want to think that you are, but youre not.", ">\n\nI think you are missing the point of the music. Might as well say instrumental music needs more lyrics.", ">\n\nAllow me to paraphrase for confused OP. Basically, is what he is saying is the covers all sound the exact same, with no variation. Think about it this way. You can listen to the same rapper over and over and not get bored of it because every song is different. Lofi covers aren't like that. With the exception of the lyrics the all follow the same flow, notes, melody, etc.\nHope this makes sense, and I'm not taking sides, as I've never listened to lofi intentionally." ]