• dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    7 months ago

    Incorrect. The only way to acquire a billion dollars in net worth is to exploit labor.

    Doesnt matter if they donated to charity. Its a tax shelter for them. Im sure Feeneys employees would have preferred to be paid higher wages.

    • crackajack@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Maybe. But we don’t know how he managed his business. His wealth was, after all, came in the 1960s and 70s at the height of air travel which he sold his items to travellers, unions were also powerful and the world was operating under the Bretton Woods agreement.

    • rosymind@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      What if someone suddenly inherited 1bn from an estranged relative, or if they won the lottery? I’d say that’s an ethical way of gaining that much wealth

      I think what defines an ethical billionare from one that isn’t, is how much they share with everyone else and how much they consume for themselves. Spending that much money properly would take time. They’d have to vet charities, hire people to help them spend it on the best things, research where to invest in (i’m talking about things like green energy) etc.

      Just food for thought. I tend to like looking for exceptions to rules (idk why)

      • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        7 months ago

        There is no ethical billionaire because to amass a billion dollar means other people that produced that much value did not get paid properly. Simple as that. If you inherit a billion dollars, it was still made on the back of workers.