Bezos wedding: Venice protestors claim 'enormous victory' after venue change
-
Maximizing value extraction is not bad as long as there is a free market. That's what drives competition and brings prices down. Of course, employees and customers need other options for this to be fair.
Unless you organize a cooperating economy, maximizing value extraction is inevitable.
Besides, you shouldn't ignore the work he does.
Maximizing value extraction is not bad as long as there is a free market.
Yes it is. It is inherently exploitative.
-
They can have their wedding in one of their beloved tax havens, not in some crumbling city that should be preserved as well as possible.
Doesn't Venice take a tax for each visitor? They should up this as much as possible. If you really want to go there you can pay a 100+ euros.
Don't get me started on cruise ships and the clientele on there.
Tax based on yearly income of the individual. Even with the creative accounting these shits do, it will still dwarf what normal people make.
-
Ironic. Venice was built by people like Bezos.
Lmao if you say so, Ayn Rand
-
"We are very proud of this! We are nobodies, we have no money, nothing!" Tommaso Cacciari, from a group calling itself No Space for Bezos, told the BBC.
"We're just citizens who started organising and we managed to move one of the most powerful people in the world - all the billionaires - out of the city."
The wedding kicks off later this week, and has a star-studded guest list of the rich and famous that is rumoured to include Kim Kardashian, Mick Jagger and Leonardo diCaprio, as well as several of the Trumps.
This is the actual answer. Remember Greenpeace, who would set sail to interrupt oil tankers?
Sailors in the Vaca Navy, what's the point in having wealth if you can't enjoy it?
-
Don't you need money to stop Venice sinking?
For temporary solutions, yes. They have three major, perpetual issues that are not solved by tourism money.
- Rising sea levels.
- Too many boats making waves rocking the foundations more.
- Too much groundwater extraction (seawater pressure will push inland with less groundwater pressure).
-
By your logic, people visit Venice for the fisher village huts.
If you don't see what the elite does, how can you live in an equal society? Then nobody does those things and the society crumbles or those who do become the next elite.
It's the people who build stuff. The elites control the resources, but they don't build shit. Ordering stuff to be done doesn't make you a builder, just as commissioning a portrait doesn't make you a painter.
People can come together and build big things without elites, kings or bosses sitting down and telling everyone what to do. Just because societies that greatly limit the power of the elites no longer exist, having been crushed, doesn't mean they don't work.
-
Maximizing value extraction is not bad as long as there is a free market.
Yes it is. It is inherently exploitative.
How is it exploitative? If you get market rates for your work or pay market rates for the stuff you buy, you don't lose in transactions.
Those who maximize value extraction optimize resource allocation and bring prices down for everybody.
-
It's the people who build stuff. The elites control the resources, but they don't build shit. Ordering stuff to be done doesn't make you a builder, just as commissioning a portrait doesn't make you a painter.
People can come together and build big things without elites, kings or bosses sitting down and telling everyone what to do. Just because societies that greatly limit the power of the elites no longer exist, having been crushed, doesn't mean they don't work.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]I know. I was not prepared for a .world community to demand and not oppose that way of thinking.
Ironic. Venice was commissioned by people like Bezos
Fine with me.
People can come together and build big things without elites, kings or bosses sitting down and telling everyone what to do. Just because societies that greatly limit the power of the elites no longer exist, having been crushed, doesn’t mean they don’t work.
Could. Hating Bezos instead of coming together and start building is the mental trap I try to point out in my other comments that is not accepted. Right now people need commissioning if they keep thinking the way they think, and they don't want to hear it.
There are pockets that work, like Wikipedia or Burning Man. But they grew slowly and are not blueprints to get other projects done.
-
Could you elaborate on "needless levels of empathy"?
irl i like to believe the best of people, can't really help it, and that has lead me to problems in relationships. so like that, one shouldn't forgive a person their infractions just because they cry.
-
irl i like to believe the best of people, can't really help it, and that has lead me to problems in relationships. so like that, one shouldn't forgive a person their infractions just because they cry.
There's a difference between feeling empathy and providing grace or forgiveness. It is absolutely acceptable and healthy to set boundaries on what you are capable of forgiving, but giving up empathy is a different story. Empathy is what makes us human, makes us care about each other. You absolutely can (and, IMO, should) keep caring about these people who have hurt you. If someone shares a true human connection with you, that matters. Thats what you should empathize with.
That said, people are products of their circumstances, environments, and the systems they grew up within. Depending on those factors, people may develop incredibly maladaptive behaviors, or be subject to untreated mental health issues; this can lead to unhealthy behaviors that harm those around them.
It is not your responsibility to fix them, nor guide them. Even if they recognize themselves as the source of their problems and wish to change and grow, it is still not your job to drag them through that process. Actively caring for someone isn't the only option. Caring for someone can be remote, can be passive or entirely uninvolved in their life. You are absolutely allowed to set those boundaries, or to set more open boundaries and do what you can to help them if you wish.
To stop caring for them altogether, however, is a mistake. If you genuinely connect with and care about someone, hang onto that. Hang onto your love for fellow humans because that empathy, that love is what keeps humans growing and moving forward. It is okay to separate yourself from those who harm you, okay to leave someone to their journey, but to stop caring for them dehumanizes yourself just as much as it dehumanizes them.
-
There's a difference between feeling empathy and providing grace or forgiveness. It is absolutely acceptable and healthy to set boundaries on what you are capable of forgiving, but giving up empathy is a different story. Empathy is what makes us human, makes us care about each other. You absolutely can (and, IMO, should) keep caring about these people who have hurt you. If someone shares a true human connection with you, that matters. Thats what you should empathize with.
That said, people are products of their circumstances, environments, and the systems they grew up within. Depending on those factors, people may develop incredibly maladaptive behaviors, or be subject to untreated mental health issues; this can lead to unhealthy behaviors that harm those around them.
It is not your responsibility to fix them, nor guide them. Even if they recognize themselves as the source of their problems and wish to change and grow, it is still not your job to drag them through that process. Actively caring for someone isn't the only option. Caring for someone can be remote, can be passive or entirely uninvolved in their life. You are absolutely allowed to set those boundaries, or to set more open boundaries and do what you can to help them if you wish.
To stop caring for them altogether, however, is a mistake. If you genuinely connect with and care about someone, hang onto that. Hang onto your love for fellow humans because that empathy, that love is what keeps humans growing and moving forward. It is okay to separate yourself from those who harm you, okay to leave someone to their journey, but to stop caring for them dehumanizes yourself just as much as it dehumanizes them.
yeah i hear you, and think you're right. still ain't gonna forgive her, just forget. and when she will inevitably appear in my spaces again (might be because this city is in actuality a fucking backwoods village) i'll remember, and will choose not to forgive again! you only get about a thousand chances with me, 'cause i don't tolerate shit. but once those are done you can consider your ass forfeit. and this person i am constantly referring to used up those thousand chances with me, and then some; i drew boundaries and she crossed them when it suited her. her type of help for a person lying on the ground was to kick them. the years i wasted dealing with that fuckwit kinda really fucked me up, but thankfully i now know not to forgive her.
-
He owns shares of Amazon, not money. If he sells those he loses his influence.
People are struggling because markets are distorted, including preventing free global movement of people. Figure out who does that before hating Bezos.
He owns shares of Amazon, not money.
