Oh Bill Burr, what a rebel. Did you say this and then hop in your limo, sipping on a cappuccino at some overpriced coffee shop in Los Angeles? Because that’s just soooo not the image of a real-life firebrand like yourself, is it?
Newsflash, Bill: “Billionaires should be put down like rabid dogs” is not radical, it’s not edgy, and it’s certainly not provocative. It’s just basic human decency. I mean, come on, you’re talking about the same people who own half the media outlets in this country. The same people who make millions off the suffering of others.
And what’s with the whole “rabid dogs” thing? Is that supposed to be some kind of clever metaphor for how these billionaire sociopaths are just running around, spreading their diseased ideology and ruining everything they touch? Please. It’s just a lazy way of putting down someone who is already being criticized by millions of people.
And don’t even get me started on the irony. You’re complaining about billionaires, yet you’ve got your own Netflix deal that’s worth tens of millions of dollars. So no, Bill, I don’t think you can talk about how you wish we’d put down these “rabid dogs” when you’re probably more concerned with padding your bank account.
I mean, what’s next? Are you going to start ranting about how much you love socialist Bernie Sanders and how we should all just give up and live in a tent city because it’s the only way to combat income inequality? Give me a break. You’re not some kind of true original thinker, Bill. You’re just another middle-of-the-road comedian who thinks he can make waves by saying whatever outrage du jour is popular.
And you know what the worst part is? I bet most people are going to be more turned off by your fluff piece than anything else. They’ll read this article and think “oh, Bill’s got a new rant!” instead of actually listening to what he has to say about the issues that really matter.
But hey, keep on complaining, Bill. Keep on talking about how you wish we’d put down billionaires like rabid dogs. Maybe if you spent more time actually doing something to change the system and less time pontificating in your limo, people would actually start listening to what you have to say.
This ain’t it.
CEOs could maintain control of society while avoiding bad press simply by providing people with what they need—living wages, healthcare, and secure retirement plans. They could still rule while ensuring a fairer system. BUT THEY WONT.
Good. Need more of this.
I do think he’s quite wealthy though…
The difference is that he isn’t exploiting the labor of others to make most of his wealth. I’m not a huge fan of most celebrities, but at least most of them are actually earning their money by generating demand for their “thing.”
Very true. I like Bill Burr, but he’s still on a lovely crested hill of property that is way out of scope of attainability from the average person.
I don’t understand the obsession with wealth here. I feel like people are missing the point that utilizing wealth to advocate for those less fortunate is still based. Most everyone is richer than us if we know their name and chopping allies down to only poor people means that your convictions to doing what’s right is contingent on meaningless values rather than class values of levels of exploitation. He makes money through his labor, just like us, it reminds me of how the internet reacted to the dock union president making bank. Your convictions end up pretty weak if a CEO could remove them by giving a raise to one person.
His net worth is between $14M and $20M. That’s a lot for you and me, but he is nobody for example next to musk’s $400B (20,000 times more)
I’d consider this way; assuming the upper bound there (20m), Elon spent over 14 Bill Burr’s worth helping Trump get elected, and that was pocket change to him.
That’s the difference in scale. Musk could lose everything Burr has ever owned and he literally would not notice.
You can maybe argue that what Burr has is too much. Personally, I really don’t care at this point. I’ll ponder the moral rightness of the existence of millionaires when there are no more billionaires.
One million seconds is a about 11 days, 1 billion seconds is just under 32 years. People underestimate the difference
The one I’ve always liked is “the difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars is… about a billion dollars”
Considering the horrifically shit quality of education in the US, you’re probably better off saying “the difference between a million and a billion dollars is 999 million dollars”.
Considering the average American is more ignorant than Philomena Cunk, are we sure they can count that high?
Bill Burr for senate
Maybe we collectively need to recognize billionaires like they recognize their workers. I propose the following:
-
“Becoming a billionaire” is still a thing that the most aggressive, ambitious sociopaths among us can aspire to. Because they and the broken people that idolize them will insist that great things cannot happen without the promise of great rewards. And obviously the only “reward” of any meaning to them is money.
-
Once you are a billionaire, you get a nationally broadcast pizza party on CSPAN and we engrave your name into a plaque in some “hall of smart winners” somewhere in DC. You are declared a champion of the economy and the President shakes your hand and declares a one-time national day to be in your honor. Or they read your name during the superbowl that year or whatever. Your place in history is locked in.
-
Assets and earnings in excess of 1 billion are seized and given to charity, or infrastructure, or healthcare or whatever. Used for the betterment of society. It should be done responsibly in a way that won’t ruin the assets, for example not liquidating billions in stock all at once.
-
The government publishes a leaderboard every year that shows which Champions of the Economy™️ gave the most back to society that year in the form of excess earnings. And we all pretend that we’re REALLY impressed.
They can have their on-paper status and their superficial adoration they hunger for. And they can even be stupidly rich by ANY standard.
Can anyone argue this is not a great idea? Even by being devil’s advocate, I genuinely can’t see any reasons why this would be worse than it currently is for anyone. 1 Billion still grants you A LOT of luxury and influence, just about as much as any single human should reasonably ever need or desire. And the best part is that we wouldn’t even need to pretend to be impressed! Imagine a parallel universe where Nole Ksum “contributed” 400 fucking billions to improving infrastructure, healthcare, and research. Wouldn’t you actually like the guy who has made the world, or at least your side of it, measurably better?
Usually when people are asked when America was Great™ they’ll point to the burgeoning middle class of the post-war economy of the 1950s. Sometimes they’ll point to separate drinking fountains however we’ll ignore racists for now. The economic nationalists won’t like it when you point out the thriving economy was partly the result of other economies still receiving from war, but more importantly for the middle class there was a 94% marginal tax rate for income over $200,000 in 1945, which meant dollars were circulating and demand was created for more jobs. The trickle-down clowns who insistent the rich getting richer is good for the economy would be slightly more credible, if they weren’t the very same people saying the poor demanding higher wages is bad for the economy. As Nick Hanauer put it:
We plutocrats need to get this trickle-down economics idea behind us; this idea that the better we do, the better everyone else will do. It’s not true. How could it be? I earn 1,000 times the media wage, but I do not buy 1,000 times as much stuff do I? I actually bought 2 pairs of these pants, what my partner Mike calls my manager pants. I could’ve bought 2,000 pairs, but what would I do with them? How many haircuts can I get? How often can I go out to dinner? No matter how wealthy a few plutocrats get, we can never drive a great national economy. Only a thriving middle class can do that.
1950s were also heavily unionized. Unions have declined by 80% since then, and “right to work” laws didn’t exist. (Also, the 40s were when unions began to realize they should be inclusive of marginalized groups. Not due to racism, but because those groups would be more likely to scab unless included)
Yep. I didn’t want to make the post much longer, but I almost went on about how this could easily be a win-win scenario.
The one speed bump I wonder about is that loss of shares means loss of control of the company and its board, which your “founder & CEO” types will not like.
…but I guess reasonable people may consider that a feature, not a bug.
And btw, thanks!
Billionaire wealth tax. No one needs a a net worth over 1B. Tax any amount over 1B. There is an easy solution to the “next dollar” over 1B while the owner remains in control. Value the shares each quarter. Any amount over 1B is converted from a common share worth $XXX to a preferred voting share with a par value of $1. The difference in value is treated as income or a capital gain and subject to tax. The owner retains their vote/control.
-
Well, that is a bit excessive.
Rabid dogs are put down because there is no cure for their disease, and they cannot be controlled, and their very existence will bring harm to others and…Nevermind.
Yah this is really hyperbolic, the reason we “put down” vicious or dangerous animals is because we’ve accepted that they are what they are and we’ve all collectively agreed that they cannot change their nature and will always be a danger to every- …oh. Okay, yeah I see.
Burr 2028: Fuck This Bullshit
A comedian is running Ukraine and he’s keeping them alive. Maybe America needs a Bill Burr/Jon Stewart combo.
1000% Jon stewart.
Guy fights like hell for the people that need it
I used to like Bill Burr. Now I love him.
Big talk from someone who constantly enables and humours that ape Joe Rogan and all his bullshit
You go where the people are if you’re equipped to make them look the fool. Bill is absolutely qualified to talk to Joe Rogan and make him look clownish. The only people who should avoid Joe Rogan are people who nod along to his Facebook stories rephrased as people he knows’ stories or offer no opposing narrative. It’s like Adam Friedman going on Jesse Petersons demonic talk show. He said to a relatively big audience, “Freaking out because a college student says death to America, even if true, is kinda pussy shit, no?”
Yeah that’s how I think too. The problem isn’t Bill Burr going on Joe Rogan, the problem is not enough people like Bill Burr go on Joe Rogan.
It’s bad for Rogan too. I use to like his show when it was him being a dumb guy talking to smart people. The smart people would explain things to him and by proxy I’d learn some things too. Or at least be entertained by a conversation between an ape talking to an astrophysicist.
But now Rogan thinks he’s got good ideas and thinks he should talk about what he thinks. And his ideas are so very bad.
Billionaire dont deserve our respect nor loyalty. They can go fuck themselves for all I care. Dogs however are loyal and love us unconditionally.😂
Rabid ones will kill you though.
so fucking true which is why we as humans need to increase funding for a crew to help more humans and animals alike.😭
Stop with this obsession with billionaires, damn. Who cares lol
They won’t notice you defend them
They won’t notice you insulting them either lol
Why you over here just casually posting pictures of heros?
The man, the myth, the legend. Just had to let more people see that smile.
He’s not the hero we deserve, but he’s the hero we need.
…I never understood that line. Like, why wouldn’t the people deserve a hero?
Of coarse, that’s assuming you take the movies POV, and think of Batman as the hero.
I mean, I don’t. But if you think he’s the hero of the movie, why would gotham not deserve him?
And in Luigis case, I DO think of him as the hero of the story. But I also think we deserve him.
So, I never got that phrase.
Because the people are to blame for the problem.
They let their city turn to shit (if you ignore the lore about the city being cursed or whatever), so why do they deserve someone else to fix their mess?
Same as in America, Americans have stood by and let their country turn to shit, do they deserve someone to save them? Nope, but they fucking need it.
Because the people are to blame for the problem.
Typical victim blaming bullshit. In an inherently corrupt system like that of Gotham or IRL New York or the US in general, 90%+ of the people don’t really have any meaningful control over what the elite does with society.
To blame the oppressed rather than rebel against the oppressors is some useful idiot shit.
People can always rise up and overthrow their leaders. There are countless examples of this happening across the globe and time, the problem is too many are comfortable with their safety in the status quo.
People can always rise up and overthrow their leaders
Sure… Because overthrowing a government that doesn’t care about civilian casualties and is backed by the most bloated and over-funded military and police in the history of the world is TOTALLY doable! 🙄
Especially when the nominal political opposition cares more about norms and procedures than actually resisting fascism.
There are countless examples
None of them with an elite anywhere near as insulated from public pressure as this one, though.
the problem is
too manythe only ones with the power to fight it are comfortable with their safety in the status quo.Fixed it for you.
“Because he’s the hero Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now”
Because the hero Gotham needed was Harvey Dent. Gotham needed hope, which Harvey represented. If Gotham knew that Harvey went evil, then it would have shown that the Joker was right. It would have shaken peoples faith and motivation to do good.
The line never said people didn’t deserve a hero.
It’s because the movies are written by christopher nolan, and that guy does not have good politics. The other guy is right with their explanation, but the underlying message is, as you say, pretty much total nonsense.
And to avoid that, all they have to do is became big damn heroes by giving their money in charity, or tax, or fund a research lab or whatever way of throwing their money back out there that they choose.
Astounding that they’d find it so detestable that they’d rather risk death in the hands of a class revolution than see their money feed kids or cure cancer or whatnot.
Disagree. Rabid dogs who must be euthanized deserve care, compassion, and respect when doing so. Rabies isn’t a life choice a dog makes.
Billionaires deserve no such care, compassion, or respect.
also did Bill Burr ever apologize for all the transphobic shit he’s said recently? Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy with anyone of any walk of life gaining class consciousness, especially if they talk about it. But it’d be even better if he’s stopped being transphobic on top of that.
I’m pretty sure the only anti lgbtq comments bill burr has ever made was a bit about how when you watch something intimate the mind tries to place you in the scenario and when it’s two guys kissing it’s really hard to stomach, but Bill Burr has always leaned left and I honestly doubt he cares in the slightest about other people’s gender or sexuality
Me: EAT THE RICH! Bill Burr: I got you fam…
- To be clear, the 1% I am speaking about are NOT the 1% of your neighborhood, county, or city(necessarily). I speak of the Global 1%. The 1% that make your retired home owning uncle with just under 1million in his retirement look like the firmly lower middle class that he is.
The global 1% include a whole lot of innocent “middle class” people in wealthier countries, like the uncle in your example.
I think maybe you mean the global .01%?
It’s a common phrase used to refer to them. If you didn’t know that you don’t belong in this conversation. If you did know that and were still a prick you’re being disingenuous.
The global 1% includes the middle class of wealthy countries. You can literally look this up. The 1% of rich countries is much smaller.
No one’s arguing that. I’m saying you knew what they meant and chose to be needlessly pedantic. Saying “The 1%” has been a common phrase for a very long time.
If you live anywhere with expensive housing in the US and own your own home, you’re part of the global 1%.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/01/how-much-money-you-need-to-be-part-of-the-1-percent-worldwide.html
No one is arguing that with you. What is it with you clowns and your complete lack of reading comprehension?
