Is Your Facebook Account Promoting Socialism?

[jamil]

You're assuming it was originally his marketable idea.

Even if it wasn't he still made it work and built it into an empire. So there is at least some ingenuity in that.

But. I don't like it when people use large platforms to stifle individual liberty like that. If he cares so much about the poor, why doesn't he use his own wealth to the fullest extent to relieve the poor, instead of trying to use other people's money to relieve the poor? With his wealth he could give 2.1 million people a living wage for one year. But he wants to take my relative pittance to do it? I say put your money where your mouth is and let me decide how and with whom I will be charitable. Charity is an individual act. If it is a collectivist act, it's really just wealth redistribution.

 

[rhino]

No I'm not. Who turned it from a novelty on a few college campuses into what it is? Who monetized it? Who led the IPO?

the others can cry about a "stolen" idea. The truth is, they didn't have the brains to do anything with it.

That's the beauty of the little freedom we have left. If I don't want to acknowledge the accomplishments of a douche bag, I don't have to acknowledge the accomplishments of a douche bag. I am free to dismiss him and what he does just because I feel like it.

For now.

 

[jamil]

That's the beauty of the little freedom we have left. If I don't want to acknowledge the accomplishments of a douche bag, I don't have to acknowledge the accomplishments of a douche bag. I am free to dismiss him and what he does just because I feel like it.

For now.

Well, he IS a douchebag. And whatever accolades a successful entrepreneur deserves for his success, being a douchebag tends to erase all that.

 

[Jludo]

Doesn't everyone? I don't think Welfare was a good idea. I don't think government giving a living wage is a good idea. Governments taking the resources from people who've earned them and giving it away to people who didn't, certainly is not what free societies do. Governments of free societies should be strictly limited on how they may spend the people's money. 50% + 1 should not get to vote themselves other people's wealth. But if you're going to advocate taking other people's money, you damn well better be willing to give up your own.

What exactly did you hear?

 

[jamil]

What exactly did you hear?

I heard what he said.

"Every generation expands its definition of equality. Now it's time for our generation to define a new social contract...We should have a society that measures progress not by economic metrics like GDP but by how many of us have a role we find meaningful. We should explore ideas like universal basic income to make sure everyone has a cushion to try new ideas."


The context was his own experience that he knew there was a cushion if his facebook idea failed. In other words, he felt he could take the risk, because America takes money from the people who succeed, to give to people who failed.

Progressively more socialism. That's what I heard.

 

[PistolBob]

Zuckerburg is another wealthy man that knows more than the rest of us and he's going to show us.

 

[jamil]

Zuckerburg is another wealthy man that knows more than the rest of us and he's going to show us.

Just another elitist **********.

 

[actaeon277]

Even if it wasn't he still made it work and built it into an empire. So there is at least some ingenuity in that.

But. I don't like it when people use large platforms to stifle individual liberty like that. If he cares so much about the poor, why doesn't he use his own wealth to the fullest extent to relieve the poor, instead of trying to use other people's money to relieve the poor? With his wealth he could give 2.1 million people a living wage for one year. But he wants to take my relative pittance to do it? I say put your money where your mouth is and let me decide how and with whom I will be charitable. Charity is an individual act. If it is a collectivist act, it's really just wealth redistribution.

I'm always amazed by the celebrities that are saying we need to "pay our fair share" to help the poor/destitute/whatever.
Yet they live in million dollar mansions.
If they believed the gibberish they were saying, they'd live in a $200,000 home or less, and have donated all the rest of the wealth.

 

[HubertGummer]

I'm always amazed by the celebrities that are saying we need to "pay our fair share" to help the poor/destitute/whatever.
Yet they live in million dollar mansions.
If they believed the gibberish they were saying, they'd live in a $200,000 home or less, and have donated all the rest of the wealth.

They like how it makes them look caring and compassionate but they, like any human, don't want to give their hard earned money away...I guess they figure they're excluded.


It is nice of them to convince others to take MY hard earned money "for the greater good" though.

 

[Jludo]

I'd like to see the math on the cost of replacing our welfare system with the universal basic income. I think it'd be superior to what we have now. Does anyone think our welfare state is going away? If best we can do is replace it with something more effecient I think that's something we should explore.

Once again, ill point Zuckerberg is giving away 99% of his income and has already given away hundreds of millions. As no one seems to want to recognize this fact. Or is it just not enough?

 

[actaeon277]

UBI will be given to everyone.
So, if you're trying to help the poor, how are you going to do that by diluting their supply of the money.
All that will happen, is people will complain that it's too low, and we need to raise it.
More and more people will go on the "dole", leaving less people paying for the "dole".

Much like now...
only accelerated.

 

[Mog]

We already HAVE a universal basic income. It's zero.

 

[rhino]

We already HAVE a universal basic income. It's zero.

 

[BugI02]

I'd like to see the math on the cost of replacing our welfare system with the universal basic income. I think it'd be superior to what we have now. Does anyone think our welfare state is going away? If best we can do is replace it with something more effecient I think that's something we should explore.

And will the amount that needs to be taken from the productive and given to the unproductive decline with time? If not, should we not 'prefer' the devil we know given that we cannot end the robbery yet and UBI is another solution in search of a problem

Once again, ill point Zuckerberg is giving away 99% of his income and has already given away hundreds of millions. As no one seems to want to recognize this fact. Or is it just not enough?

Bill and Melinda as well as Warren are wayyy ahead of him, what's holding him back?

The road to somewhere is paved with something something

 

[Jludo]

UBI will be given to everyone.
So, if you're trying to help the poor, how are you going to do that by diluting their supply of the money.
All that will happen, is people will complain that it's too low, and we need to raise it.
More and more people will go on the "dole", leaving less people paying for the "dole".

Much like now...
only accelerated.

Is there any evidence at all that it'd accelerate the expansion of the welfare state?

[video=youtube;xtpgkX588nM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtpgkX588nM[/video]

 

[Jludo]

Bill and Melinda as well as Warren are wayyy ahead of him, what's holding him back?

The road to somewhere is paved with something something

Gates and Buffet are in their 60's and 80's. Zuckerburg has given more to charity than any of us could hope to give in our lifetimes yet INGO complains he's not selling all his Facebook stock and giving it all away immediately.

 

[BugI02]

And certain people on INGO cite what Zuckerberg says he is going to do as if it is already done, just like they do with Trump ... Oh! ...wait!

 

[Jludo]

Looking for somebody to do the numbers on a negative income tax. This website does a cost calculator for negative income tax, at 14400 dollars and a 50% phaseout/effective tax rate it puts the cost at 102% our current welfare system


https://dqydj.com/negative-income-tax-cost-calculator-united-states/

 

[BugI02]

Gates and Buffet are in their 60's and 80's. Zuckerburg has given more to charity than any of us could hope to give in our lifetimes yet INGO complains he's not selling all his Facebook stock and giving it all away immediately.

Mark Zuckerberg/Net worth
63.3 billion USD
2017

Discounting the fact that his money is continuously making more money, on that principal alone he could give away $5million per day, every day, for a bit more than 34 2/3 years. He should get busy and leave my money out of it

 

[actaeon277]

Gates and Buffet are in their 60's and 80's. Zuckerburg has given more to charity than any of us could hope to give in our lifetimes yet INGO complains he's not selling all his Facebook stock and giving it all away immediately.

Liberals like to talk about people with more money than they "need".
Well, I'm sure Zuckerburg can get by on less.