• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    35 days ago

    So you’re saying the objective take that billionaires suck is less accurate than your one billionaire sucks less?

    • @RedditRefugee69
      link
      English
      25 days ago

      You seem to have forgotten the context of the conversation and fallen in love with fighting with me.

      Which is better:

      • A rich person who gives to charity

      • A rich person who does not

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        45 days ago

        My premise is that billionaires suck.

        Philanthropy porn sucks.

        A billionaire giving shit away to lower their tax burden and engage in more philanthropy porn to make themselves even more money is even shittier.

        If you want to force the conversation toward semantics to make yourself right over a relative determination that one is better (less shitty), go ahead. If that’s what constitutes “better” for you.

        • @RedditRefugee69
          link
          English
          14 days ago

          Yeah, and mine is that some suck worse than others.

          You keep pretending that’s not the case, though. It’s cute.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        25 days ago

        To your argument, Kim Kardashian has actually helped people, she has helped get innocent people exonerated and released from prison.

        I would argue her charitable work is VASTLY more substantial than Mr. Beasts’.

        Having said that… They are both terrible people and the world would be a better place without either one of them. They are both absolute whores for attention and could have achieved the same amount of charitable service without throwing themselves in front of a camera for it. Arguably stealing attention away from the people that did the actual work.