this post was submitted on 29 May 2024
254 points (97.7% liked)

Not The Onion

12344 readers
448 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz 103 points 5 months ago (6 children)

You know what happens when an entire nation is exposed to luxurious lifestyles of an extremely wealthy minority?

Revolution. Revolution happens.

Chinese politicians know this fact too well, that's why they're trying to make rich people hide their wealth.
I mean actually fixing the problem is out of the question, that would be communism.

[–] blargerer@kbin.social 26 points 5 months ago (1 children)

This is one of those laws where I fundamentally disagree with the state having the power to make laws like this because the power will be misused, but in this instance, I actually think the law seems fine? Its not just exposing actual luxurious lifestyles like you imply, its also people going into debt to fake a higher level of lifestyle than they actually live, and this self perpetuates through social media like a virus.

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 36 points 5 months ago (1 children)

If the government gave even a single shit about the poor, they would focus on banning wealth hoarding not wealth flaunting.
But they don't, so they aren't.
What they are doing is openly showing who they are and what they do care about (capitalists, on both counts), you not wanting to believe it is a different problem.

[–] applepie@kbin.social 7 points 5 months ago

Hoarding would be sufficient.

Limiting peoples ability to express rarely results in desired outcome.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 15 points 5 months ago (1 children)

you and me are probably exposed to extreme luxury from a minority, but revolution aint happening anywhere rn

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee -5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yup. And for me the reason is I don’t see rich people as a threat to me.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 7 points 5 months ago

have you been living under a rock?

[–] electric_nan@lemmy.ml 6 points 5 months ago

Idk. That exposure happens here, and it mostly makes people go into debt trying to emulate the appearance of wealth.

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

You know what happens when an entire nation is exposed to luxurious lifestyles of an extremely wealthy minority?

They also want the same thing.

[–] NotAnotherLemmyUser@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Communism wouldn't fix much, and it would only be a temporary fix. It doesn't work well at a larger scale which is why every country that has tried it has either fallen apart or turned into a dictatorship.

We're better off finding the proper balance between capitalism and socialism until someone comes up with a better system that actually works.

[–] Sethayy@sh.itjust.works 10 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I mean most houses crumble when you hit em with a tornado but were still building houses.

What i mean to say is I think we can agree there's enough noise in most previous communism attempts, making them pretty shitty data to base your hypothesis off off

[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. Gotta suppress those aspirations before they get out of hand. Wealth is just the theme in this case, but could be anything else.