I buy social medias and news outlets. Then I weaponize them to support a clueless gullible idiot candidate for POTUS.
I use my influence on him to get a position that will allow me to get grossly richer by favoring my own businesses, including crushing unions and force my employees to work to death on low wages.
When I reach 1 trillion $, I’ll have much more resources to improve the planet and living conditions of my fellow humans.
But wait! Maybe I could do even more for humankind with 2 trillions $??
Kinda hate that I’m upvoting you.
Assassinate the other billionaires. I genuinely believe billionaires are the source of all the biggest problems the planet has right now.
Someone is simply going to take their place. The problem isn’t the billionaires themselves, its the system.
We can do a lot more to change the system without a bunch of over-moneyed under-principled techbros trying to stop us.
You’re just worried about the loud ones who are usually loud because they aren’t rich. Its the quiet really rich ones you need to worry about
Fair. The techbros are emblematic of the problem, but it extends far outside the tech industry.
But if we do that today, what do we do tomorrow? When someone someone else takes that vacant CEO position and starts receiving that ludicrous salary, what then?
If you killed every billionaire every month, they probably wouldn’t have time to seriously affect society, but then I suspect we’d have other problems. I have a feeling that would produce some negative outcomes for the economy and general quality of life.
Not if you pick off each new billionaire.
Exactly what I came here to say. Hire a group, and tell them to start at the top of the Forbes list and work their way down. Send anonymous letters to media outlets that surrendering their wealth is the only way to save their lives.
It would dramatically improve the quality of living on this planet within 3 months.
Create a fake lottery to help get a fascist into office for the end goal of turning that $300bil into $1tril.
here are a few ideas I had:
- invest / subsidized green tech
- lobby to stop oil and gas subsidies
- lobby to stop meat subsidies
- lobby for stricter environmental taxes and regulations.
- subsidize repair services so that it’s cheaper for people to fix things instead of buying new
- offer bad politicians a lot of money to resign
- buy companies that provide essential services (water gas net) and make them non profits
- do the same to things like Uber Facebook Google, and make ads optional
- make public transit free
- make affordable healthcare
- set up a charity with whatever’s left. withdraw 4% a year and split evenly it between to anyone who asks for it
with whatever’s left
Heh, several of your bullets can eat that full amount.
welp. if I ever become president then there goes the national debt
Solve the billionaire problem
Assuming it’s the US
- set up a fund to provide free school lunches until the government provides them
- give grants for people to set up housing co-ops
- hire my own army of Russian trolls (they do not need to be Russian, I am inclusive to all trolls) to fracture conservative unity/support progressive
- buy up some social media companies. (YouTube would be best, but I don’t the 300 billion is enough) make the algorithm progressive
- whatever is left over goes to renewables and conservation efforts
Fund free education and health care for everyone in the world regardless of race, nationality and creed. Imposed no matter how much kicking and screaming certain countries might do to oppose it. With appropriate countermeasures for each specific country that opposes it. A random country in the middle east that hates educating girls or whatever? Armed guards and other related measures as needed. US has entrenched for profit health care? Fund legislation that rips out the entire system by the roots etc.
Excess funds would be invested in such a way as to fund those programs in perpetuity. With safeguards put in place so that I can be reasonably certain that it won’t be easy to dismantle from within or without.
Assuming I have enough money left over, I’d do the same for housing.
If I still have money left over if also fund ways of tackling the climate crisis and changing corporate strategy so instead of chasing infinite growth in a finite world the mentality is more about stability and stewardship, of the company and of the planet.
There are about 2 billion people under 14 in the world. Assuming half of them have access to free education you would still only have $300 per student.
Change other countries beliefs, by force if necessary? Ive heard that before somewhere…
But its not wrong because were the good guys!
Not what I had in mind when I said that, but intent doesn’t translate well over text. What I had in mind is protection for the school/students from people who would rather enforce their views through force, nothing more than that. The idea is that everyone has a chance to get an education.
Yeah that sounds better^^ But Im afraid it wouldnt be that effective then, if e.g. a majority of a country believes that women shouldnt go to school, most probably wouldnt even if given the chance, because of pressure from friends and family.
Trains
bribe (sorry, i mean lobby) politicians to vote in interest of humanity. Environmental protection, public healthcare, solve the housing crisis/homeless epidemic, increase education budget spending, etc.
My initial thought was that since 10% of the population hoard 50% of the wealth, that I would take that 300,000,000 and divide it amongst the other 90% to flip the corporate script on it’s head. But it turns out that’s only 40 bucks per person…
I’ve long held the belief that the greatest damage to the working class is the phrase “you should feel lucky to even have a job.” Because it allows the corporations to largely do whatever they want, creating a top-down economy by default.
But imagine if people only had to work if they wanted to. A writer could write without needing to get a “real job”. A carpenter who loves making homemade furniture and selling it no longer has to limit his hobby because he’s unable to make a living doing it. A person has a dream of running their own coffee shop, but can’t because they need all of their hours to just make sure the kids are fed.
If everyone can pursue a living how they want to make a living instead of stepping on our passions because there are bills to pay, then suddenly, the corporations have to deserve US, and not the other way around. I don’t need your shit wages. I don’t need your lack of health care. Make it worth my while for me to give my skills to your company or GTFO.
That’s essentially the dream of a UBI, and I initially thought I could kick start that by spreading my 300 billion around to the 90% rank and file. But it turns out I’m shit at math.
You know you can get a nice militia with those billions, would be a shame if that militia went after the 0.5% to distribute their wealth
Yeah. That can buy a shit load of assasins
Am I allowed to say I’d take out a few hits - in this totally fictitious scenario? Because that’s what I’d do. When the scum rises to the top it’s always best to wipe it off so it doesn’t suffocate what’s underneath. .
Try to buy over 50% of ExxonMobil or Shell (Saudi Aramco and Sinopec probably aren’t up for grabs) and shut down everything I can while holding on to the owned/leased land so nobody else can start there either. Fossil fuels get more expensive, hopefully pushing for a green change, and at least some of them remain in the ground.
There is a danish researcher called Björn Lomborg who has been researching this type of question a lot. He tends to get a lot of hate because the most cost efficient ways to spend money to do good isn’t what people want it to be.
What are the most cost-efficient ways?
Iirc, micronutrients and HIV prevention, followed by preventing malaria. The idea is that we spend a little money now, to make many people grow up and be healthy, which avoids big costs to societies while at the same time generating people who can contribute more to the same societies. Many people want to solve the climate first, but it’s very expensive for very little return. In an ideal world we would solve all the problems, but… we don’t. So if we have limited resources, we should spend it where it does most long-term good. It’s not a bad idea to do good things for the climate, but if we have to choose between things to do, it gives little benefit per dollar compared to other things.
Assumption is thats in dollars:
Buy every single relevant news outlet, social media platform and information network. Then you remove all the right-wing garbage and replace it with the actual truth. Agressivly ban accounts who spread lies and hate for violating guidelines. Make accounts visible if they are bots or not.
Be partisan about it: Progressive ideas over conservatism.
In essence: Remove as much poison from the internet as possible, so people are no longer getting sucked into conservative pipelines and bubbles.
So you wouldn’t actually change anything, you’d just be closing down avenues of debate and saying “I’m right, you’re wrong”.
I think you’ve just wasted your money.
Is it new money or money that already existed? If it already existed, burn it.
