UK to leave EU

[Edwardo Piet]

Yup. It really is Brexshit.

But in the case of billionaires my sympathies are limited. It's the working people and their savings I'm concerned over. Billionaires bet in the international gambling halls against the rest of us. So, though luck, if they lose.

Me too generally speaking...

But of course even someone like Bill Gates who everyone hates has given so very very very money to charity that morally speaking (as a consequentalist) he has done a fuck ton of good in the world.

It's the poor I am concerned about, not the rich. But it is the case that some rich people are philanthropists who do a lot of good in the world even if they're utter utter dicks and their intentions are shitty.

Money has power to both harm and help... and sometimes that power can help even if done purely for selfish reasons.

If a super duper mega rich billionaire donates a bunch of money merely to make themselves look good and they don't actually give a shit about all the people they are helping with their philanthropy... I am still nevertheless super glad that they donated the money and I'll gladly take their dickish reasons for doing it if it helps save some lives of the less fortunate.

It's very common for even non-philanthropists to do some donating to charity so people don't call them selfish bastards... even if the only reason they're doing it is so people don't think they're selfish bastards.... and the richer the person the bigger the donations.

So I guess I generally think anyone losing money is all things being equal a bad thing. Any money being lost is a bad thing by default because money has the power to help the less fortunate... it's only when I know that the rich people in question do more harm than good with their money that I consider it a good thing that they lost their money.

Not saying you think that, and I would obviously agree that the less fortunate losing money is worst of all... after all I only care about the rich losing money when they potentially could have helped the poor.... I'm just trying to make a point that by default I consider any loss of money bad because it's a loss of power to help, not just a loss of power to harm.

Just saying it works both ways.

I know I have rambled and been repetitive in this post... I just struggle to make my point clear and be thorough without being rambley and repetitive. Sorry anyway though if I have come across completely the wrong way.

I hope it goes without saying that ultimately it's only those who are unfortunate that I care about financially speaking and I only really care for the finances of the fortunate when it has an at least possibly potential impact on the unfortunate.

Have I been clear? Have I made sense?

[Edwardo Piet]

I'm curious... "He said a deal should be made allowing UK access to the single market and a compromise on free movement of workers." I thought being in the EU was that deal..?

Nope, it's possible to retain those without actually being an EU member.

Yes I agree. And when it comes to trading with the EU being part of the EU is probably the most straightforward and effective way of doing it [emoji2]

[Losty]

I did not know everyone hates Bill Gates. Have I been living under a rock?

[Edwardo Piet]

Nah I was being facetious there.

All I meant was "many many people used to complain about Microsoft and years ago when he still made the important decisions regarding Windows it became a stereotype that it was all Bill Gates fault."

From what I have actually seen of him -- his website where he talks about all the books he is reading, he's an avid reader, and his TED talk where he talks about the importance of saving the environment -- and the fact he has indeed chosen donate so much to charity... I actually like him and think the way he has been stereotyped in the past was harsh and unfair.

ETA: I guess all I'm saying is even if the stereotypes were true and Bill Gates was just a rich dude who donated to charity because he was pressured about not donating enough when he was so super rich.... even if he didn't actually care and only donating to improve his image... morally speaking as a consequentalist I would much rather someone give huge amounts of money to the less fortunate for shitty reasons than small amounts for honorable reasons... good intentions are overall good and bad intentions are overall bad but at the end of the day it's the consequences that matter.

[Losty]

I just never knew he was negatively stereotyped to begin with.

[Edwardo Piet]

Oh. I read it in some computer magazine once.

---

LOL joke I wouldn't come to that conclusion just based on that... that was the first time I learned of the stereotype back in the early ninties... I loved to read computer magazines as a kid.

Years back whenever people complained about Microsoft and Windows Bill Gates always seemed to be the one people blamed... ever since he delegated his decisions to others a lot more the response tends to be "But he's not making those decisions anymore so stop blaming him" and that seems to have neturalized a lot of the mean criticisms of him.

---

[Jackalope]

I can think of a lot of reasons to dislike Microsoft but Gates is one of the good guys as far as I'm concerned.

[The Grand Nudger]

Gates is the paper slip man.  That's just hater speak for "he monetized our ideas before we realized we had ideas".

[Edwardo Piet]

I can think of a lot of reasons to dislike Microsoft but Gates is one of the good guys as far as I'm concerned.

I have always felt the same way. Personally I've never disliked him. And I think criticisms of him used to be a lot harsher than they are nowadays. I also think that's because he used to have more control -- and hence responsibility -- over his company years ago so people liked to blame him for everything because it was an easy potshot to make.

Would you agree?

[Edwardo Piet]

I think this thread is proof that when you're on the internet... all roads ultimately lead to Gates... it's like the reverse-Godwin. Lol.