• Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nope. If someone with a net worth of $100m or more takes a gamble and loses, the company goes under and people lose their jobs while the rich guy gets a loan or a tax write-off.

    “Seeing opportunities” for huge possible gains for yourself with all significant risks being to people much less fortunate than you and taking it isn’t a virtue, it’s self-centered greed.

    • aceshigh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      the key to my statement is “being able to take the risk”. poor folks can’t take the same risks that the wealthy folks can take.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        And what my statement was meant to convey is the fact that the ventures you so laud are all reward and no risk for the rich and all risk and no reward for the poor.

        If it had been a game of crabs, the rich would be rolling 4 loaded dice, picking which two count after throwing. The poor would have one dice at most, the most beneficial numbers missing at all times.