this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2026
1453 points (99.7% liked)

Technology

81907 readers
5040 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com 127 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (15 children)

Let's say the pre-Trump economy is worth $100 trillion, and a particular billionaire's share is $2 billion. Let's say Trump catastrophically decreases the economy's value to $50 trillion, while increasing corruption such that that Trump is getting more power, and the billionaire's share is $10 billion.

This is followed by a collapsing market that creates a dip in share prices or private valuation, the assets of which can be bought for pennies on the dollar, eventually leading to that billionaire having $30 billion in a total economy worth $20 trillion.

Win/win for Trump and the billionaire, at the cost of everyone else.

That's basically what's happening, and will continue to happen.

[–] kn0wmad1c@programming.dev 22 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (11 children)

I'm not an economist, so here's my ass talking, but I don't think your example scales out. I think you're making the mistake of equating the stock market to the economy. It isn't.

Not everyone wins in a failing economy. If one billionaire makes out, three more lose money.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

I just want to inject here my experience in Britain during the 2008 Crash and its aftermath:

In Britain, the Finance Industry was 17% of GDP, so when the Crash happened the country was disproportionally hit.

After the crash the autorities chose to protect Asset Owners above all:

  • Interest rates were lowered to 0%, thus protecting lenders (i.e. those with the money to lend or ownership of Banks which in the modern system can de facto create money: if you don't believe me, read the paper "Money Creation In The Modern Economy" from the Bank Of England) from debt defaults, also indirectly protecting Asset Owners by avoiding asset firesales from collateral confiscated after a default thus avoiding the associate asset price falls, most notably for Land and Housing (in the UK the Housing bubble never really stopped being inflated and Land Ownership is the core of Old Wealth)
  • Banks were unconditionally saved by the state taking a share in them. That Public share was then put under management of a group made up of bankers "so that the government doesn't interfere in the market". De facto pressure for changing from the very practices that had cause the Crash was removed and most of the people having the blame for the failures of the Crash kept their positions of privilege.
  • All this was paid by most people through Austerity. Public services were cut, Social Security (aka "Benefits) were reduced, salaries stagnated. The poorer one was the worst they got hit.

By 2015 the incomes of the top wealthier 10% of the population were growing in real terms 23% per year whilst the bottom 90% were seeing their incomes fall 1% per year in real terms.

This was roughly how things went for about a decade after the Crash. UK inequality is nowadays huge, social mobility near non-existent, average incomes when measured in a currency other than the pound - which went down following Brexit - have stagneted, overall economic growth is anemic and concentrated in highest wealth layers since that "growth" told by official GDP numbers is mostly asset prices going up.

This is the process by which the billionaires make sure they win: everybody gets hit more or less in a Crash, but in during the subsequent period when the state is supposedly trying to fix it, you get also sorts of "extreme measures required by extreme times" that, "curiously", help the billionaires the most, so some years later everybody but the wealthiest slices of society are worst of whilst the wealthiest are much richer even than before the Crash.

I expect the plans of the billionaires who are cozying up with Trump is exactly to end up richer via this process.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I'm pretty sure this is exact same thing that happened in USA.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Yeah, I believe so based on what I saw from affar, but I'm more intimatelly familiar with Britain - especially the more subtle elements of politics and policy - since I lived there from before the Crash until Brexit.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)