• Artemis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’m not having kids because billionaires have bribed, lobbied, and misinformed this country, and by extension the world, to the brink of ruin

  • Obinice@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why report on that guy’s opinions as if they matter? He’s rich, not a voting rights expert.

    He’s a fascist, too, which people conveniently ignore because he’s rich and some of it might rub off on them.

    • MrCrowBard@lemmy.fmhy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      For the same reason the opinion of someone like Rupert Murdoch matters. Its not about their viewpoint directly as an individual, its the fact they control massive platforms that can and do sway public opinions.

      In murdochs case he’s had an influential impact on British politics over the last 40 years and has used his media empire to act as a king maker.

      Musk isn’t as savvy or as intelligent as Murdoch but that doesn’t mean is influential position should be ignored.

    • zeeps@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t like Elon Musk, but can you explain what makes him a fascist? I feel like people are really throwing that term around a lot and it’s kind of concerning.

      • cook_pass_babtridge@programming.dev
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think eliminating voting rights for citizens without children is a fascist policy. Fascism is about enforcing a “correct” or “natural” hierarchy in society. Historically this has usually been about race, but has also included other factors (for example, disabled people were the first group targeted for extermination by the Nazis). For some of us, not having kids is a choice (and imo a valid one that shouldn’t be punished by the state). But this sounds like an easy way to discriminate against same-sex couples, and all fascist systems have a history of doing that.

      • sleet01@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s a fair question, but you’re probably getting downvoted because you “feel like people are really throwing that term around a lot and it’s kind of concerning”. People are throwing the term around a lot because of all the fascism, and the fact that you find the term more concerning than the actual fascism is a bad look.

      • Necronomicommunist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I personally find Ur-Fascism by Umberto Eco a good read. Fascism is really hard to pin down because it’s quite a wide category due to the different tendencies in history.

        • cmbabul@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The War on Everyone by Robert Evans is another good one for our current situation, he draws and builds from Ecos definition there

  • Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Welcome to the rise of aggressively pro-natalism billionaires, because it’s 2023 and we’re not imploding fast enough.

    Remember, you won’t have a seat on the transport to Mars. And if you ever get there, it will be to work the mines.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I disagree with his fundamental premise that people with children can see the interests of society better.

    I don’t have children, but I have heard from every possible source that once you have children they become your world.

    How is a person expected to reason clearly about the interest of millions of people when they are running an ancient biological program focused on the interests of a tiny family unit?

    edit: I once saw the argument that having family doens’t make you a better person. Having family makes you a ruthless user and taker on behalf of your family. Most of the stories you hear of people giving in to corruption, happen because those people can’t afford to lose their jobs, because they have mouths to feed. Once you have kids, you must choose whether you value your kids over your civic responsibility, or vice-versa.

    • postmateDumbass@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      People with children won’t have the time to research issues too deeply, and they will be sleep deprived for several years.

      They make better sheep.

  • wackypants@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    To think that not so long ago, this authoritarian, grifting man-child was hailed as the real-life Tony Stark. If the mask slips any further, even his remaining fanboys are going to find it difficult to defend him.

  • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ah yes, “I don’t want to say gay and intersex people shouldn’t be allowed to vote, but I do want it to happen.”

    Anyways I’m sterile and drive the most fuel efficient vehicle practical, don’t eat meat, and have made other sacrifices for future generations to have a habitable planet. Musky here has a private jet and at least one of his kids hates him

  • zgasma@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I support 100% tax over $1 billion. If you can’t manage on a billion dollars, the rest would be better spent on others, anyway.

    • sci@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      They don’t actually have 1 billion dollars tho, they have stocks with an estimated value of 1 billion dollar. I don’t think there’s an effective way to tax that.

      • mrpants@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        More realistically you can make more tax brackets for levels of income higher than $500k. Cash income regularly exceeds this for CEOs.

        You can also pass laws restricting how much can be paid out in ways other than cash both in value and percentage of shares. Or increase capital gains tax further past certain limits (this has already happened in 2013). Or have a graduated tax on loans taken against certain collateral (like stocks, bonds).

        The laws themselves can get a bit complicated but such is law. There are plenty of ways to make sure the rich pay their fair share. They just don’t want us doing it.

  • zefiax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    People forget a huge side of this as well. It’s not just being financial able to have kids but physically able. More and more people now days are seeking fertility treatment and having fertility issues. According to elon, those people would not have the right to vote.

  • PhoenxBlue@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is this guy literally having a psychosis?

    His actions lately (I say lately, loosely) have been absolutely batshit bonkers.

    I’m enjoying the show none the less

    • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      What happened to free speech absolutist

      It turns out he’s a disingenuous shit-bag. But you didn’t need me to tell you that.

    • bi_tux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because they like two things: money and power.

      If the people are free, they have less of both