🎵 It burns so bright I want to feel your love 🎵

Katelynn, 19, proud Aussie 🇦🇺

[feministism]

[durkin62]

That info comes from a study done by the FBI that actually says 2-8% are proven false and 2% are proven true. The other 90 something percent being unknown.

This is what we call being a lying cunt.

[jakemorph]

tony stark is just such a stupid character. hes like if batman sucked. literally every one of the avengers has powers that make them basically unstoppable but tonys like “i have enough money to solve poverty but im going to help the american imperial machine instead”

[jakemorph]

ahhh weapons kill people! gotta stop making weapons! *gives my best friend, a military commander, a wearable tank and calls it the “War Machine”*

[jakemorph]

the people commenting about how batman is literally the same look stupid as fuck… obviously in real life rich people should not exist and any rich person who continues to be rich is a bad person but tony stark and bruce wayne are not real rich people so we need to look at the CONCEPTS behind them. batman fighting organised crime is not the same fucking thing as iron man fanning the fires of imperialist conflict throughout the world

[paramud]

Bruce Wayne also like donates to charity and medical research and infrastructure development shit while Tony Stark made an iron man convention in his own personal Disney land

[siryouarebeingmocked]

It was a blatant World’s Fair reference. A year-long technology and innovation expo. Which was his dad’s idea in the first place.

Tony also funded MIT student projects to the tune of millions if not tens of millions.

[hst3000]

Given how closely Stark works with the USG, I imagine that NASA is absolutely in love with his propulsion tech

[katelynnp7]

Okay, I love Batman, but even I have to disagree with OP. If Tony Stark earned his money, let him do whatever the fuck he wants with out. Who are you to dictate what he does with his money? And a bit of double standards when you say something is fine for one character and not the other. They're both superheroes who look to save others in need, they just have different avenues of doing so.

[kiss-my-piss]

Resources for Male Victims of Abuse

How to Recognize Abuse

**Emotional Abuse of Men

**Sexual Assault of Men and Boys

**Men Can Be Victims of Abuse, Too

**Domestic Violence Against Men - Know the Signs

**Information for Male Survivors of Sexual Abuse

**Help for Battered Men

**Battered Men, Battered Husbands

**For Male Survivors of Rape and Sexual Abuse

**Male Survivors of Incest and Sexual Child Abuse

**Help for Men Who Are Being Abused

Help Lines (Phone and Text Chat)

National Domestic Violence Hotline: [phone] (or 1-800-787-3224 for TTY)

National Dating Abuse Hotline: [phone]

National Sexual Assault Hotline: [phone]

National Suicide Prevention Hotline: [phone]

Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men: 1-888-743-5754 (US and Canada)

Hopeline Suicide Prevention Hotline: [phone]

National Hotline for Victims of Crimes: 1-855-484-2846

National Human Trafficking Hotline: [phone]

Polaris Human Trafficking Text Line: Text “BEFREE” to 233733

**1in6/RAINN Chat for Male Survivors of Sexual Abuse

Support Groups

**1in6 Support Groups

Male Survivor Support Groups

Pandora’s Aquarium - Chat (includes chats specifically for men)

Pandora’s Aquarium - Forums (includes forums specifically for men)

How to Find a Shelter

Domestic Shelters Search (shelter locator with filters to find shelters specifically for male survivors)

SAFE (located in Austin, TX, but states they can help people find resources/shelters in their area)

How to Find a Therapist

**Male Survivor Therapist Directory

Mental Health Services Locator

Resources for and About the Abuse of Kids/Teens

Love is Respect Hotline: [phone] (Hotline for teens)

Darkness to Light Helpline (Sexual Abuse): 1-866-367-5444

Darkness to Light Text Line: Text “LIGHT” to 741741

ChildHelp USA National Child Abuse Hotline: [phone]

Children of the Night Hotline (Children in Prostitution): 1-800-551-1300

National Runaway Safeline: 1-800-786-2929

Covenant House Nineline (Homeless Youth): 1-800-999-9999

Stop it Now Hotline: [phone] (for adults concerned about the welfare of a child)

Jennifer Ann’s Group (for teens experiencing dating violence)

Other Resource Lists 

(While I tried to include the most helpful resources I could here (i.e., resources that lend themselves to one-on-one communication, individual reading, etc.), there are plenty of other great resources, including regional resources, listed in these links. Some of the resources are specific to men and others aren’t, but they are all helpful for male survivors.)

**Male Survivor (regional, international, and online resources)

**Husband Battering: Men and Domestic Violence

**Help for Battered Men: Online Resources

**Help for Battered Men: National and International Resources

**Help for Guys: Help for Victims (some resources for men, many general resources)

[mogai-watch]

This is so important. 

[everywitchway-deactivated201905]

SLAMS that reblog

[ireneadlercatwoman]

This is amazing @sexuallymonsterous you are a good person for putting this list together. 

[feminismfuckyeah]

The soccer gender pay gap is ridiculous

[greekgodohair]

Assume I’m dead and rotting when this isn’t reblogged from my dash.

[licensetomurse-deactivated20200]

Update from April 2017: Source: CNN Money, http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/05/news/us-womens-soccer-equal-pay/index.html “The U.S. Women’s National Soccer Team is getting a raise, bigger bonuses and the same per diems as the men. The women’s team announced Wednesday that it had struck a new labor deal with U.S. Soccer, the sport’s governing body. For months, the women have said that their pay and treatment is unequal to the men’s team. The women will also get better hotel and travel accommodations and will be reimbursed for the years when their per diems were less than those of the men.” Finally some good news for the USWNT!

[noonmutter]

Reblogging with the bit that gives the outrage some closure.

[obama-stolemy-vcr]

👍👍👍

[earthshaker1217]

Yaayyy

[durkin62]

Remember the bit where like an Olympic level women’s soccer team got their asses handed to them by a boys soccer team. Like, think maybe that has anything to do with the “pay gape”.

[mornington-the-crescent]

The women’s Olympic soccer team might be the best women’s soccer team in the world, but if they don’t put as many butts in seats as the men do, then they’ll always be paid less. Fewer people watching = lower ticket sales, and lower advertising revenue, so less payout for them.

[katelynnp7]

Also merchandise is a major income prospect for teams worldwide.

I don't understand why people are constantly pushing this issue. Men are biologically faster and fitter than women, meaning they play the game better and therefore are more entertaining to watch.

[cwote]

Let yourself feel.

Thanks for the inspiration @kindersuggestion :)

[katelynnp7]

Okay but roundhouse kicking someone because they don't share the same opinions as you is an over reaction. Pouring drink on someone for wearing a hat that you don't like is an over reaction. Harassing someone because they're wearing a shirt that you don't like is an over reaction. Causing chaos at a university to stop a speaker you don't want on campus is an over reaction.

Bursting out in tears because someone said something you don't like is being really fucking sensitive.

Sure, you're allowed to feel however the hell you want, but don't act like over reacting isn't a thing. Grow thicker skin, be self-aware, improve yourself and you'll live an easier life.

[feministism]

[memeseverdie]

Also if a drunk woman can’t consent, then neither can a drunk man.

[castiel-smites-pedos]

And if a grown woman makes advances on a little boy, he shouldn’t be lucky. She should be in jail with all the other pedophiles.

[cheshireinthemiddle]

A much needed message

Not supporting PETA =//= Not supporting better treatment of animals.

Not supporting Susan G. Komen =//= Not supporting breast cancer research.

Not supporting Autism Speaks =//= Not supporting autism awareness.

Not supporting BLM =//= Not supporting racial equality.

Not supporting feminism =//= Not supporting gender equality.

[problematicparrot]

Finally, a sane celebrity who doesn’t bend the knee to feminist bullshit.

Source

[ren-of-rationality]

My god I love her.

[mango-thot-deactivated20190520]

I know people are gonna get salty af about this but by God she’s RIGHT.

When Brad Pitt did Fight Club, he was cutting weight for every single scene to maintain his physique at 155. I’ve you’ve ever cut weight, you know how horrible that must have been. He did it because they needed a “look”.

Changing Tatum said his Magic Mike body doesn’t last for more than five days. He starved down and dehydrated his already fit physique for a “look”.

The male soldiers on Spartacus: Blood and Sand were eating pretty much chicken and veggies for every meal to maintain a “look”.

Why is this such a big deal? Because all these characters are considered physical goals for men. These are actual unobtainable physical standards for men. Male body image issues get swept under the rug so often that some people don’t even think they exist.

[katelynnp7]

When liberals find a celeb that isn't a liberal

They get mad apparently... And stupid

The cop killed in question?

(not that the colour of his skin should matter).

And from what I've read, the killer is still at large. I will never understand how they think this shit is okay, a man died and here someone is with a large following trying to put the word out to get this dickhead behind bars and people are mad because he didn't follow the agenda they wanted him to.

[theforgottenjew]

Why is he even still a thing?

[rootbeergoddess]

Stop supporting this asshole for all that is holy!

[pissvortex]

video for context

[kewlbot-deactivated20181218]

youtube about to be like

[homochadensis]

dude straight up raised 200k for impoverished indian children to be called ‘racist’ by a band of retards who dont even bother to watch the vid in question, in which he specifically shouted out that channel for goddamn ANIME REVIEW CONTENT. do you honestly expect people to watch THE ENTIRETY of a persons uploaded videos before mentioning them in relations to content that doesnt even remotely relate to those videos? Where are the 200k u idiots raised for impoverished 3rd world children?

[not-selfconfrontation]

Don’t know anything yet about this pewdiepie drama, but donating money to charity doesn’t mean shit. That’s, like, one of the first things shitty rich people point to to try and cover their asses. And depending on the charity, it’s likely that most of that money ended up in the pocket of someone else instead of going towards the actual children. Stop using charity to cover up people’s shitty actions.

[noelleian-deactivated20190923]

“Sure, he raised $200k for impoverished children, but does he boast about his moral superiority on social media like I do?”

I swear, someone could discover a cure for cancer and y’all would still be like, “Okay that’s great and all, but like, this one time he literally agreed with something a republican said so maybe we can like, not applaud a literal racist, sexist, misogynistic, ableist, homophobic transphobe?”

[black-girl-against-feminism]

We got “woke bitch” up here complaining about a youtuber who has probably done more than she ever has in social justice. I understand sweetheart. Get those praise points from your friends.

[not-selfconfrontation]

none of that was specifically about pewdiepie because like I said, i haven’t checked out any of what he actually did. i’m just stating the fact that lots of shitty people donate to charity and that doesn’t change anything about their shitty behavior. stop using charity to ignore the things that shitty wealthy people do. don’t know why you’re mad about it but go ahead.

[black-girl-against-feminism]

Go off Karen. Let’s generalize and make assumptions about people for things that you didn’t bother to look up because of what “other people” have done. Yes, that’s the way society should work. Stay negative. I’m so proud of you.

[not-selfconfrontation]

who am i making assumptions about? because i already said that i’m not talking about pewdiepie or anyone specific. i’m not gonna pass any judgement on him if i don’t know what he’s even done so i’m not and never claimed i was. is reading comprehension outta style now? if someone does something shitty, i won’t ignore it because they also donate to charity. trump donates to charity. hilary clinton has her goddamn foundation. im not going to ignore the shitty things they do and say because of that. Why is that such a problem for you? People shouldn’t get a pass because they donate to some charities. That’s the way society should work. you’re the one who came up here mad about some facts, go do that somewhere else.

[black-girl-against-feminism]

Bitch, that doesn’t absolve you from what I said. Like I said, you’re making generalizations about “everyone” due to some people’s actions. Last time I checked Trump and Hilary aren’t everyone. I never said anyone is absolved from anything just because he or she donates to charity. I’m saying that looking at the situation, who the person is, and what the person has done is more important than bringing out pitchforks because said person has done something disagreeable.

Also, don’t try to backtrack and say you weren’t trying to talk about certain people. We’re in a post about Pewdiepie, which you reference in your post about him, and you’re trying to throw negativity on what he has done by generalizing celebrities who donate to charity. Stop trying defame someone without doing research about the person. You’re doing nobody justice boo.

[amkrii]

This whole thing is ridiculous. Are Elektra and Atlantic records run by racist because they released Panetra albums? Because Phil Anselmo has done some pretty stupid shit over the years and a few of those things have been racist, either as edgy jokes or sincere sentiment is unclear, but neither label signed the band, released their content and slapped their seal of approval on all of Phil’s shit by doing so.

PewdiePie liking ONE video and pointing viewers to a channel is even less than that.

[katelynnp7]

You know what I find especially funny. The guy who "exposed" PDP had fucking Antifa shit in the background. Literally no self awareness at all.

[mailebartolome]

Feminist Friday

When Robert Downey Jr. was asked about his acting process and Scarlett Johansson was asked how she got into shape 

Two-time Oscar-winning Cate Blanchett 

Designer & author Lauren Conrad 

Award-winning Emma Stone 

When award-winning actress Julianne Moore was asked to put her fingers into a “Mani Cam” 

When award-winning Elisabeth Moss did 

Emma Watson

Rihanna 

Megan Fox

Nicki Minaj 

[5slicesofpepperonipizza]

All of my role models in my life. 

[lacqueluster]

Speak your mother fucking mind.

[katelynnp7]

1. Men get asked this same question all time. Just ask the likes of Christian Bale.

2. Women tend to wear head to toe looks, so the camera men pan to show off the whole look whereas guys tend to just go in a simple suit so there's no point.

3. In all honesty that was a pretty funny response. Although I'd am have to see the full interview to get context.

4. I feel like Emma Stone was simply trying to be funny. And I don't for the life of me understand how fucking compliments are sexist now.

5. I don't see how this could be at all construed as sexist.

6. Not terrible advice. But, she should only do it if its her passion in life, not simply to prove her dad wrong or because a celebrity told her so.

7. I don't see how this could be considered sexist, either. She's just saying she's not looking to date anyone at that moment.

6. Megan Fox was fired from Transformers for being incredibly unprofessional. According to other members of the cast or crew, she was constantly on her phone and refused to take directions from the director. I don't know about you, but that sounds kinda bitchy. This fact alone makes it very hard for me to believe anything she is saying.

7. I can't really find a fault with this one. Except for maybe the fact that sometimes it's better to stay quiet and actually listen to what the other person is saying before hand. Sometimes self awareness is a good thing.

Lesson learned: some celebs are big fucking idiots who will use any reason under the sun to virtue signal (no surprise there) and none of these examples did anything to help with Gender equality.

[yourladyindank]

Next time she demands respect and says insults aren’t an option. I want y’all to remember this. Next time she says theists are delusional and stupid, I want y’all to remember this. Next time she calls someone’s argument invalid because of their religion or because they threw an insult, I want y’all to remember this. This is a college drop out trying to call me a cowardly delusional liar. And when I proved her wrong at every turn, she attempted to hide behind a shield of atheism. I’d like to remind you all the original argument in the messages was about whether or not behaviors in animals were humanized and thus mistaken as homosexual when the actions had nothing to do with sex at all. But she was losing. So what better topic to bitch about than religion, something that cannot be proven or disproven, because you’re scared.

@atheism-populism-egalitarianism

[evie-infinity-deactivated202308]

This girl is all over the place.

[scrubdaddydippedinliquidnitrogen]

I can think of at least 5 atheists that I know who are super respectful about religion, and even though they dont believe in it and when asked will voice their view they still understand why people are religious and respect that.

[katelynnp7]

She's kinda of lacking a little bit of self-awareness, isn't she?

[fandomsandfeminism]

Thought: I do NOT think that 50% of the world’s billionaires should be women. I think there shouldn’t be any billionaires at all.

[cranberrybogmummy]

So you are saying 0% of the world should be billionaires?

[fandomsandfeminism]

Yes.

[caosdth]

Why shouldn’t their be billionaires? That makes no sense.

[fandomsandfeminism]

Because the existence of billionaires is predicated on the exploitation of human labor and unsustainable environmental harm.  That level of wealth hoarding is harmful to economies, as it reduces the amount of money in circulation. No one person, no family, could ever conceivably even SPEND a billion dollars anyway, and  it is inherently immoral to accumulate wealth so narrowly while so much of the world lives in abject poverty.  

Better then to create a wealth ceiling, a point at which all wealth over a certain point  is taxed at or very near 100% to incentivize people to actually spend their money rather than hoard it, stimulating the economy and bettering the lives of far more people. Better even still to create and regulate economic systems that protect workers and the environment in a way that such extreme levels of wealth accumulation aren’t even feasible. 

[aflawedmind]

The problem with this is that it reduces the incentive to actually do fiscally well. What’s the point of starting a business if you can’t become wealthy?

[fandomsandfeminism]

There is a very real difference between “reasonably wealthy” and A BILLIONAIRE

[twodotsknowwhy]

No one is saying you shouldn’t have a nice house, we are saying that having multiple really, really ridiculously nice houses while your employees are either homeless or at serious risk of becoming homeless is immoral.

[whenandwhereienter]

I’ll never understand why this concept is hard for people. I think it’s because they can’t actually fathom how much $1 Billion is.

[fandomsandfeminism]

Seriously.

Let’s say you have a badass job. A great job. You make $100 AN HOUR. You work 10 hours a day ($1000 A DAY), 5 days a week ($5000 a week!!!), every week ($20,000 A MONTH), thats $240,000 Every Year.

It would take you 4,167 years to make a billion dollars.

[demonikolai]

God dammit

[postilionstruckbylightning]

If you were making, for the sake of argument, $25 million a year, you could live a life of extreme luxury. Even then, it would take you forty years of spending none of that money to amass a single billion. There are multi-billionaires out there. No one needs that kind of money.

[iamthecutestofborg]

Currency came into existence to simplify trade. It was meant to make things easier and better for society. When a single person has more than they need, even more than they would need for an extravagant lifestyle, they’d completely unreasonable. Money isn’t meant to be hoarded for status. I honestly think billionaires are addicted to money.

[katelynnp7]

You know billionaires only got rich because they cam up with an idea that helped millions upon millions of people and employed hundreds and thousands of people to make their idea a reality, right?

Why should you take away the money that these people worked hard to get and were smart with how they spent it? You know that’s theft right? And who are you to dictate how much is too much in earnings?

And billionaires such as Warren Buffet have given BILLIONS of dollars to charities, something they wouldn’t be able to do if they weren’t successful in the first place.

Honestly I will never take someone complaining about capitalism over the Internet seriously. Because you are benefitting from it through whatever device you are using to complain about it. Do you not see the irony?

[fandomsandfeminism]

This is honestly so funny. I thought it was a sarcastic post for the first half of it.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/times-watchdog/minorities-exploited-by-warren-buffetts-mobile-home-empire-clayton-homes/

https://publicintegrity.org/business/warren-buffetts-mobile-home-empire-preys-on-the-poor/

Man, its such a good thing that Buffet exploited and preyed upon the poor to build a fortune because it lets him give to the poor. That’s definitely a good and flawless system.

But also:

[katelynnp7]

1) Could you maybe supply links that work please? I’m on mobile and can’t be fucked to copy the whole thing and delete it just to get to a website.

2) You didn’t acknowledge any other point, including the fact that these people worked their asses off (most likely harder than you have worked in a day in your life, but I digress) to get where they are going, had to employ other people (as in give others the opportunity to have a job and supply for their family) and were smart with what they did with their money (i.e put it back into their business or helped other people who wanted to create a business that benefitted others through investment, therefore helping another business create even more jobs).

3) Have you done anything at all besides complaining about it on Tumblr (a capitalist invention, by the way)? If not, my last point still stands.

4) You understand that taking their money from them simply because you believe they have to much is theft, right?

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. I’m on mobile too. Google search “Warren Buffett exploits the poor” if its too much trouble for you.

2. “Worked their asses off” my ass. His father was a congressman, and much of his fortune was made by exploiting others. And Employing other people isnt charity. Being a CEO isnt an act of kindness.

3. I’m sorry, what qualifications do you want exactly for my critisms to be valid in your illustrious eyes?

4. Taxation and labor regulations arent theft.

[katelynnp7]

1) The only website listed that spoke about “exploitation of the poor” was the second. And a lot of that could boiled down to not being smart with their own money. I know it sounds incredibly rash and a little mean, but if it’s all these people had to accept a massive loan to own a house, they should have at least done some shopping. This company has the highest interest rate by at least 6 points. You’re telling me they didn’t think to look at other places with lower rates? Furthermore if they are contracted a particular rate the company legally has to abide by that, and if they don’t they can sue them in court. And I understand that the company will have a team of lawyers, but if its in contract form, written and signed, there’s not many loopholes they could pull out of their ass that a judge will likely take. Unless theres something in the fine print, which you should always read.

2. You have yet to supply me with any evidence that he was exploiting anyone. And him reaping the benefits of his father’s (or his father’s father, we can keep going down the line if you want) labour isn’t a bad thing. He used that money in a way that would make him more money. Its called being smart with money.

I never stated employing other people was a form of charity. However it allows other people the ability to supply for their families. I have still yet to see how this is a bad thing.

3) Do I seriously need to be qualified to agree with my own opinion? It’s my opinion. You’re snarky answer has me feeling that my assertion is right, you’ve done nothing more than complain on Tumblr. Which I find hilarious because Tumblr is a capitalist invention. I don’t need to be qualified to find that funny.

4) Taxation for what, though? Simply having what the government deems to much money? I don’t know, taking money away from people simply because you don’t like the amount they are making sounds like theft to me.

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. This is the first paragraph of the first link: “Clayton Homes has used a pattern of deception to help extract billions from poor customers around the country — particularly people of color, who make up a substantial and growing portion of its business. ”

So. Like.

And, honestly, if you dont see how specifically targetting poor people, especially minorities, with predatory lending practices is exploitative, that seems like a personal issue. And blaming poor people for being misled into predatory lending situations seems, uh, pretty ignorant.

2. You literally responded to multiple sources about him exploiting people.

3. I asked you what MY qualifications needed to be for MY opinion to be valid. But again, this “tumblr is capitalist” argument is nonsense.

4. Property tax. Income tax. Inheritance tax. Asset tax. The same taxes we all pay, but, ya know, scaled up to account for their level of wealth. Which isnt theft. Its how society pays to maintain itself.

[katelynnp7]

1. Saying people should be educated before they make decisions which includes large amounts of money isn’t ignorant, its common sense, and should be taught in schools. And nothing has been found of any of these claims to be true, otherwise the company would be in a shit tone of trouble.

2. We haven’t agreed that it’s exploitation. Also, should I assume that you agree that companies are able to supply jobs for others which in turn allows them to supply for their families?

3. I apologised, I must have quickly read over that third point. In order to answer your question, pretty much anything other than complaining on a website that uses advertisement to keep it running. Or from a phone that was a capitalist invention.

4. Do you see what consequences that would have? What’s stopping those people from moving somewhere else where more beneficial for themselves and take their company with them, leaving thousands of people jobless?

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. You do know that subprime mortgage loans are what caused the 2009 financial crisis, right? Yeah, lots of people got very very rich fucking over poor people with predatory housing loans, wrecked our entire economy for several years and….basically got away with it.

2. If all workers are paid fairly at every level and it isnt exploiting customers as well.

3. “But you use a CAPITALIST PHONE!!!”

Do you know why I keep posting this?

4. “But if we ask rich people to pay taxes, they might leave and exploit some other country’s labor force!” I literally dont care

Rich people shouldn’t be exempt from taxes because they employ others. That’s fucking nonsense. That argument states that only the poor should have to pay taxes. The rich are above the law. Which is bullshit.

[katelynnp7]

1. I’m not going to take your word for it, I haven’t paid much attention to the US economic system, but I’ll do further research and come to my own conclusions. No offence to you but I don’t really trust many people, especially over the Internet.

2. Define fairly

3. You understand why I keep saying the same thing, yeah? You’re complaining about something, not doing anything about it and benefitting by using the very thing invented by the concept you’re complaining about. It’s the definition of irony.

4. I never once said anything about taxes in general. I’m speaking of a specific tax purely to inhibit billionaire status. And it’s great that you don’t care for those who would possibly lose their jobs simply because you hate rich people.

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. K. Well, point being that, uh, predatory housing loans are kinda a thing.

2. At least a living wage, in proportion to the value of their labor.

3. So you dont really understand the comic, eh? Cool cool. Ok.

So, let’s try this: a person can partake in a system and still think that system cam be improved. One does not need to abandon society for a self sustaining farm commune to have an opinion on society’s flaws.

4. I don’t think it’s ethical to have only the poor pay taxes because the ultra-rich can hold employment for a lot of people hostage.

I think a better economic set up would be a lot of smaller companies in a free but well regulated marketplace that all fairly pay their employees, rather than a tiny number of mega monopolies that can threaten the US economy if they aren’t given the tax breaks they want.

[katelynnp7]

1. Cheers, I’ll look into it.

2. We can partially agree on. I don’t think minimum wage (low skill) jobs are meant to supply a living wage. I think they’re supposed to give you a foundation of what the working world is like and assist in living expenses if needed, but not the primary income.

3. My apologies, I assumed you were a socialist/communist

4. Again, I never personally stated that the rich shouldn’t have to pay taxes. I think that’s idiotic. But I would love to know what you mean by well regulated. Because I don’t know about you, but to me the government doesn’t know how to do much right, if anything.

[fandomsandfeminism]

2. There is no “minimum wage rent” or “minimum wage groceries” labor is inherently worth a living wage. It IS the primary income for many people, like it or not.

3. I’m a democratic socialist who supports a basic income system, socialized necessities, and a well regulated marketplace. I think small, local, largely co-op based businesses are ideal for marketplace needs.

4. I’d trust the government, which can be held accountable by the populace, over private megacorps any day of the year.

[katelynnp7]

2. Would love for some sources if you don’t mind. Where I’m from low wage jobs are not seen as for living purposes. More for teenagers who want to start saving for a car and other expenses. It shouldn’t be seen as such. People should be asking for promotions or looking for jobs elsewhere if they feel they’re contribution isn’t taken seriously. Otherwise they’re stuck at the bottom.

3. Then my point stands. I am sorry but I have yet to see a socialist country, regardless of whether or not “democratic”, working anywhere in society and doesnt lead to people eating rats in the street. And I don’t think having a shit tone of “socialised safety nets” really teaches anyone about personal responsibility because the government will simply help them out. However, I wouldn’t argue against there needing to be some form of assistance, but nothing like completely free health care or college. Also, I think Bernie Sanders is kind of a massive idiot.

4. Assuming you’re in the US, would you trust your current government? Again, I don’t think any government could handle such a large responsibility. I personally believe that the smaller the government, the better. But its fine to agree to disagree.

[fandomsandfeminism]

2. You want sources that you don’t get a discount on rent and groceries if you are paid minimum wage?

Or sources that people live on minimum wage?

In 2017, 80.4 million workers age 16 and older in the United States were paid at hourly rates, representing 58.3 percent of all wage and salary workers. Among those paid by the hour, 542,000 workers earned exactly the prevailing federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. About 1.3 million had wages below the federal minimum. Together, these 1.8 million workers with wages at or below the federal minimum made up 2.3 percent of all hourly paid workers. Source: https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2017/home.htm

3. I don’t think “personal responsibility” is a good reason to allow people to die, and no one asked about Bernie. But I’m interested in why you think the Nordic countries are “eating rats in the street ” while 40 million Americans are food insecure. ( https://hungerandhealth.feedingamerica.org/understand-food-insecurity/ )

4. I don’t trust Trump with safety scissors and glue sticks, but I still think government regulation, which is subject to public oversight, is more trust worthy than ultracapitalist megacorporations.

[katelynnp7]

2. I meant sources for the claim that Labour is inherently worth a minumum wage, sorry I should have specified.

3. Would you mind listing these Nordic countries that are supposedly democratic socialist? Because the countries Sanders uses (I use him because he’s pretty much the face of the ideology in US at the moment) have come out and said specifically in response to him (if I remember correctly) that they are not socialist countries.

4. The public doesn’t too much besides vote who they want to represent them. Do you think there should be a national vote everytime the government wants to implement new law? Because that seems incredibly impractical to me.

[fandomsandfeminism]

2. It is my personal moral belief that all labor is worth a living wage, because the idea that someone should work full time and not make enough money to live is unethical and reeks of exploitation. I don’t know what sources you want for my moral and ethical beliefs.

3. Any source for that? Because the nordic countries have pretty heavily mixed economies with strong socialist safety nets. But nice dodge on America’s food insecurity numbers.

4. I literally didnt say that. You’re just making shit up.

[katelynnp7]

2. Then I think we should agree to disagree because we will be talking in circles due to morality being very subjective.

3. Here and I never said I was completely against the government helping out its people, especially those below the poverty line. I just don’t think it’s practical or sustainable to have everything pretty much handed out to people.

4. I never said you did. I was asking a legitimate question as to how you think that would work in practice.

[fandomsandfeminism]

2. “People shouldnt be given starvation wages” doesnt seem that subjective.

3. No one is asking for tax-funded sports cars. But healthcare and education are pretty fundamental and other countries fund those things through taxes just fine.

4. You think government accountability only exists within direct democracies? Because. Uh, thats absurd.

[katelynnp7]

2. There’s a lot more to that statement that I can really be bothered to get into.

3. There’s a difference to access to health care and education and the right to health care and education. Both involve the labour of others, one voluntary and fairly paid, the other one not so much. And also includes for things that don’t benefit them in the slightest.

4. No. And I know this because the US isn’t a direct democracy. I’m simply asking how your theory would work in practice.

[fandomsandfeminism]

3. People still get paid when services are funded by taxes. I’m a public school teacher. I get paid. The service I provide is tax funded.

4. Holding the government accountable? Hearings, the press, elections, the justice system.

[katelynnp7]

3. Their wages are no where near as good as they would be if private. Also completely socialising both education and health care had a lot of consequences. Canada's wait time has nearly tripled since the 90s. Public schools tend to have shittier teachers than private because there's no incentive to be a good teacher (unless you actually care about teaching). How many times do you hear that kids feel like they aren't learning as much as they should be? That their teachers hand them "packets" (I think they're called) and go on their phones?

4. Okay, but how would that work in your system? How do you completely get rid of all major corporations without completely bankrupting the country?

[fandomsandfeminism]

Thought: I do NOT think that 50% of the world’s billionaires should be women. I think there shouldn’t be any billionaires at all.

[cranberrybogmummy]

So you are saying 0% of the world should be billionaires?

[fandomsandfeminism]

Yes.

[caosdth]

Why shouldn’t their be billionaires? That makes no sense.

[fandomsandfeminism]

Because the existence of billionaires is predicated on the exploitation of human labor and unsustainable environmental harm.  That level of wealth hoarding is harmful to economies, as it reduces the amount of money in circulation. No one person, no family, could ever conceivably even SPEND a billion dollars anyway, and  it is inherently immoral to accumulate wealth so narrowly while so much of the world lives in abject poverty.  

Better then to create a wealth ceiling, a point at which all wealth over a certain point  is taxed at or very near 100% to incentivize people to actually spend their money rather than hoard it, stimulating the economy and bettering the lives of far more people. Better even still to create and regulate economic systems that protect workers and the environment in a way that such extreme levels of wealth accumulation aren’t even feasible. 

[aflawedmind]

The problem with this is that it reduces the incentive to actually do fiscally well. What’s the point of starting a business if you can’t become wealthy?

[fandomsandfeminism]

There is a very real difference between “reasonably wealthy” and A BILLIONAIRE

[twodotsknowwhy]

No one is saying you shouldn’t have a nice house, we are saying that having multiple really, really ridiculously nice houses while your employees are either homeless or at serious risk of becoming homeless is immoral.

[whenandwhereienter]

I’ll never understand why this concept is hard for people. I think it’s because they can’t actually fathom how much $1 Billion is.

[fandomsandfeminism]

Seriously.

Let’s say you have a badass job. A great job. You make $100 AN HOUR. You work 10 hours a day ($1000 A DAY), 5 days a week ($5000 a week!!!), every week ($20,000 A MONTH), thats $240,000 Every Year.

It would take you 4,167 years to make a billion dollars.

[demonikolai]

God dammit

[postilionstruckbylightning]

If you were making, for the sake of argument, $25 million a year, you could live a life of extreme luxury. Even then, it would take you forty years of spending none of that money to amass a single billion. There are multi-billionaires out there. No one needs that kind of money.

[iamthecutestofborg]

Currency came into existence to simplify trade. It was meant to make things easier and better for society. When a single person has more than they need, even more than they would need for an extravagant lifestyle, they’d completely unreasonable. Money isn’t meant to be hoarded for status. I honestly think billionaires are addicted to money.

[katelynnp7]

You know billionaires only got rich because they cam up with an idea that helped millions upon millions of people and employed hundreds and thousands of people to make their idea a reality, right?

Why should you take away the money that these people worked hard to get and were smart with how they spent it? You know that’s theft right? And who are you to dictate how much is too much in earnings?

And billionaires such as Warren Buffet have given BILLIONS of dollars to charities, something they wouldn’t be able to do if they weren’t successful in the first place.

Honestly I will never take someone complaining about capitalism over the Internet seriously. Because you are benefitting from it through whatever device you are using to complain about it. Do you not see the irony?

[fandomsandfeminism]

This is honestly so funny. I thought it was a sarcastic post for the first half of it.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/times-watchdog/minorities-exploited-by-warren-buffetts-mobile-home-empire-clayton-homes/

https://publicintegrity.org/business/warren-buffetts-mobile-home-empire-preys-on-the-poor/

Man, its such a good thing that Buffet exploited and preyed upon the poor to build a fortune because it lets him give to the poor. That’s definitely a good and flawless system.

But also:

[katelynnp7]

1) Could you maybe supply links that work please? I’m on mobile and can’t be fucked to copy the whole thing and delete it just to get to a website.

2) You didn’t acknowledge any other point, including the fact that these people worked their asses off (most likely harder than you have worked in a day in your life, but I digress) to get where they are going, had to employ other people (as in give others the opportunity to have a job and supply for their family) and were smart with what they did with their money (i.e put it back into their business or helped other people who wanted to create a business that benefitted others through investment, therefore helping another business create even more jobs).

3) Have you done anything at all besides complaining about it on Tumblr (a capitalist invention, by the way)? If not, my last point still stands.

4) You understand that taking their money from them simply because you believe they have to much is theft, right?

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. I’m on mobile too. Google search “Warren Buffett exploits the poor” if its too much trouble for you.

2. “Worked their asses off” my ass. His father was a congressman, and much of his fortune was made by exploiting others. And Employing other people isnt charity. Being a CEO isnt an act of kindness.

3. I’m sorry, what qualifications do you want exactly for my critisms to be valid in your illustrious eyes?

4. Taxation and labor regulations arent theft.

[katelynnp7]

1) The only website listed that spoke about “exploitation of the poor” was the second. And a lot of that could boiled down to not being smart with their own money. I know it sounds incredibly rash and a little mean, but if it’s all these people had to accept a massive loan to own a house, they should have at least done some shopping. This company has the highest interest rate by at least 6 points. You’re telling me they didn’t think to look at other places with lower rates? Furthermore if they are contracted a particular rate the company legally has to abide by that, and if they don’t they can sue them in court. And I understand that the company will have a team of lawyers, but if its in contract form, written and signed, there’s not many loopholes they could pull out of their ass that a judge will likely take. Unless theres something in the fine print, which you should always read.

2. You have yet to supply me with any evidence that he was exploiting anyone. And him reaping the benefits of his father’s (or his father’s father, we can keep going down the line if you want) labour isn’t a bad thing. He used that money in a way that would make him more money. Its called being smart with money.

I never stated employing other people was a form of charity. However it allows other people the ability to supply for their families. I have still yet to see how this is a bad thing.

3) Do I seriously need to be qualified to agree with my own opinion? It’s my opinion. You’re snarky answer has me feeling that my assertion is right, you’ve done nothing more than complain on Tumblr. Which I find hilarious because Tumblr is a capitalist invention. I don’t need to be qualified to find that funny.

4) Taxation for what, though? Simply having what the government deems to much money? I don’t know, taking money away from people simply because you don’t like the amount they are making sounds like theft to me.

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. This is the first paragraph of the first link: “Clayton Homes has used a pattern of deception to help extract billions from poor customers around the country — particularly people of color, who make up a substantial and growing portion of its business. ”

So. Like.

And, honestly, if you dont see how specifically targetting poor people, especially minorities, with predatory lending practices is exploitative, that seems like a personal issue. And blaming poor people for being misled into predatory lending situations seems, uh, pretty ignorant.

2. You literally responded to multiple sources about him exploiting people.

3. I asked you what MY qualifications needed to be for MY opinion to be valid. But again, this “tumblr is capitalist” argument is nonsense.

4. Property tax. Income tax. Inheritance tax. Asset tax. The same taxes we all pay, but, ya know, scaled up to account for their level of wealth. Which isnt theft. Its how society pays to maintain itself.

[katelynnp7]

1. Saying people should be educated before they make decisions which includes large amounts of money isn’t ignorant, its common sense, and should be taught in schools. And nothing has been found of any of these claims to be true, otherwise the company would be in a shit tone of trouble.

2. We haven’t agreed that it’s exploitation. Also, should I assume that you agree that companies are able to supply jobs for others which in turn allows them to supply for their families?

3. I apologised, I must have quickly read over that third point. In order to answer your question, pretty much anything other than complaining on a website that uses advertisement to keep it running. Or from a phone that was a capitalist invention.

4. Do you see what consequences that would have? What’s stopping those people from moving somewhere else where more beneficial for themselves and take their company with them, leaving thousands of people jobless?

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. You do know that subprime mortgage loans are what caused the 2009 financial crisis, right? Yeah, lots of people got very very rich fucking over poor people with predatory housing loans, wrecked our entire economy for several years and….basically got away with it.

2. If all workers are paid fairly at every level and it isnt exploiting customers as well.

3. “But you use a CAPITALIST PHONE!!!”

Do you know why I keep posting this?

4. “But if we ask rich people to pay taxes, they might leave and exploit some other country’s labor force!” I literally dont care

Rich people shouldn’t be exempt from taxes because they employ others. That’s fucking nonsense. That argument states that only the poor should have to pay taxes. The rich are above the law. Which is bullshit.

[katelynnp7]

1. I’m not going to take your word for it, I haven’t paid much attention to the US economic system, but I’ll do further research and come to my own conclusions. No offence to you but I don’t really trust many people, especially over the Internet.

2. Define fairly

3. You understand why I keep saying the same thing, yeah? You’re complaining about something, not doing anything about it and benefitting by using the very thing invented by the concept you’re complaining about. It’s the definition of irony.

4. I never once said anything about taxes in general. I’m speaking of a specific tax purely to inhibit billionaire status. And it’s great that you don’t care for those who would possibly lose their jobs simply because you hate rich people.

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. K. Well, point being that, uh, predatory housing loans are kinda a thing.

2. At least a living wage, in proportion to the value of their labor.

3. So you dont really understand the comic, eh? Cool cool. Ok.

So, let’s try this: a person can partake in a system and still think that system cam be improved. One does not need to abandon society for a self sustaining farm commune to have an opinion on society’s flaws.

4. I don’t think it’s ethical to have only the poor pay taxes because the ultra-rich can hold employment for a lot of people hostage.

I think a better economic set up would be a lot of smaller companies in a free but well regulated marketplace that all fairly pay their employees, rather than a tiny number of mega monopolies that can threaten the US economy if they aren’t given the tax breaks they want.

[katelynnp7]

1. Cheers, I’ll look into it.

2. We can partially agree on. I don’t think minimum wage (low skill) jobs are meant to supply a living wage. I think they’re supposed to give you a foundation of what the working world is like and assist in living expenses if needed, but not the primary income.

3. My apologies, I assumed you were a socialist/communist

4. Again, I never personally stated that the rich shouldn’t have to pay taxes. I think that’s idiotic. But I would love to know what you mean by well regulated. Because I don’t know about you, but to me the government doesn’t know how to do much right, if anything.

[fandomsandfeminism]

2. There is no “minimum wage rent” or “minimum wage groceries” labor is inherently worth a living wage. It IS the primary income for many people, like it or not.

3. I’m a democratic socialist who supports a basic income system, socialized necessities, and a well regulated marketplace. I think small, local, largely co-op based businesses are ideal for marketplace needs.

4. I’d trust the government, which can be held accountable by the populace, over private megacorps any day of the year.

[katelynnp7]

2. Would love for some sources if you don’t mind. Where I’m from low wage jobs are not seen as for living purposes. More for teenagers who want to start saving for a car and other expenses. It shouldn’t be seen as such. People should be asking for promotions or looking for jobs elsewhere if they feel they’re contribution isn’t taken seriously. Otherwise they’re stuck at the bottom.

3. Then my point stands. I am sorry but I have yet to see a socialist country, regardless of whether or not “democratic”, working anywhere in society and doesnt lead to people eating rats in the street. And I don’t think having a shit tone of “socialised safety nets” really teaches anyone about personal responsibility because the government will simply help them out. However, I wouldn’t argue against there needing to be some form of assistance, but nothing like completely free health care or college. Also, I think Bernie Sanders is kind of a massive idiot.

4. Assuming you’re in the US, would you trust your current government? Again, I don’t think any government could handle such a large responsibility. I personally believe that the smaller the government, the better. But its fine to agree to disagree.

[fandomsandfeminism]

2. You want sources that you don’t get a discount on rent and groceries if you are paid minimum wage?

Or sources that people live on minimum wage?

In 2017, 80.4 million workers age 16 and older in the United States were paid at hourly rates, representing 58.3 percent of all wage and salary workers. Among those paid by the hour, 542,000 workers earned exactly the prevailing federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. About 1.3 million had wages below the federal minimum. Together, these 1.8 million workers with wages at or below the federal minimum made up 2.3 percent of all hourly paid workers. Source: https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2017/home.htm

3. I don’t think “personal responsibility” is a good reason to allow people to die, and no one asked about Bernie. But I’m interested in why you think the Nordic countries are “eating rats in the street ” while 40 million Americans are food insecure. ( https://hungerandhealth.feedingamerica.org/understand-food-insecurity/ )

4. I don’t trust Trump with safety scissors and glue sticks, but I still think government regulation, which is subject to public oversight, is more trust worthy than ultracapitalist megacorporations.

[katelynnp7]

2. I meant sources for the claim that Labour is inherently worth a minumum wage, sorry I should have specified.

3. Would you mind listing these Nordic countries that are supposedly democratic socialist? Because the countries Sanders uses (I use him because he’s pretty much the face of the ideology in US at the moment) have come out and said specifically in response to him (if I remember correctly) that they are not socialist countries.

4. The public doesn’t too much besides vote who they want to represent them. Do you think there should be a national vote everytime the government wants to implement new law? Because that seems incredibly impractical to me.

[fandomsandfeminism]

2. It is my personal moral belief that all labor is worth a living wage, because the idea that someone should work full time and not make enough money to live is unethical and reeks of exploitation. I don’t know what sources you want for my moral and ethical beliefs.

3. Any source for that? Because the nordic countries have pretty heavily mixed economies with strong socialist safety nets. But nice dodge on America’s food insecurity numbers.

4. I literally didnt say that. You’re just making shit up.

[katelynnp7]

2. Then I think we should agree to disagree because we will be talking in circles due to morality being very subjective.

3. Here and I never said I was completely against the government helping out its people, especially those below the poverty line. I just don’t think it’s practical or sustainable to have everything pretty much handed out to people.

4. I never said you did. I was asking a legitimate question as to how you think that would work in practice.

[fandomsandfeminism]

2. “People shouldnt be given starvation wages” doesnt seem that subjective.

3. No one is asking for tax-funded sports cars. But healthcare and education are pretty fundamental and other countries fund those things through taxes just fine.

4. You think government accountability only exists within direct democracies? Because. Uh, thats absurd.

[katelynnp7]

2. There's a lot more to that statement that I can really be bothered to get into.

3. There's a difference to access to health care and education and the right to health care and education. Both involve the labour of others, one voluntary and fairly paid, the other one not so much. And also includes for things that don't benefit them in the slightest.

4. No. And I know this because the US isn't a direct democracy. I'm simply asking how your theory would work in practice.

[fandomsandfeminism]

Thought: I do NOT think that 50% of the world’s billionaires should be women. I think there shouldn’t be any billionaires at all.

[cranberrybogmummy]

So you are saying 0% of the world should be billionaires?

[fandomsandfeminism]

Yes.

[caosdth]

Why shouldn’t their be billionaires? That makes no sense.

[fandomsandfeminism]

Because the existence of billionaires is predicated on the exploitation of human labor and unsustainable environmental harm.  That level of wealth hoarding is harmful to economies, as it reduces the amount of money in circulation. No one person, no family, could ever conceivably even SPEND a billion dollars anyway, and  it is inherently immoral to accumulate wealth so narrowly while so much of the world lives in abject poverty.  

Better then to create a wealth ceiling, a point at which all wealth over a certain point  is taxed at or very near 100% to incentivize people to actually spend their money rather than hoard it, stimulating the economy and bettering the lives of far more people. Better even still to create and regulate economic systems that protect workers and the environment in a way that such extreme levels of wealth accumulation aren’t even feasible. 

[aflawedmind]

The problem with this is that it reduces the incentive to actually do fiscally well. What’s the point of starting a business if you can’t become wealthy?

[fandomsandfeminism]

There is a very real difference between “reasonably wealthy” and A BILLIONAIRE

[twodotsknowwhy]

No one is saying you shouldn’t have a nice house, we are saying that having multiple really, really ridiculously nice houses while your employees are either homeless or at serious risk of becoming homeless is immoral.

[whenandwhereienter]

I’ll never understand why this concept is hard for people. I think it’s because they can’t actually fathom how much $1 Billion is.

[fandomsandfeminism]

Seriously.

Let’s say you have a badass job. A great job. You make $100 AN HOUR. You work 10 hours a day ($1000 A DAY), 5 days a week ($5000 a week!!!), every week ($20,000 A MONTH), thats $240,000 Every Year.

It would take you 4,167 years to make a billion dollars.

[demonikolai]

God dammit

[postilionstruckbylightning]

If you were making, for the sake of argument, $25 million a year, you could live a life of extreme luxury. Even then, it would take you forty years of spending none of that money to amass a single billion. There are multi-billionaires out there. No one needs that kind of money.

[iamthecutestofborg]

Currency came into existence to simplify trade. It was meant to make things easier and better for society. When a single person has more than they need, even more than they would need for an extravagant lifestyle, they’d completely unreasonable. Money isn’t meant to be hoarded for status. I honestly think billionaires are addicted to money.

[katelynnp7]

You know billionaires only got rich because they cam up with an idea that helped millions upon millions of people and employed hundreds and thousands of people to make their idea a reality, right?

Why should you take away the money that these people worked hard to get and were smart with how they spent it? You know that’s theft right? And who are you to dictate how much is too much in earnings?

And billionaires such as Warren Buffet have given BILLIONS of dollars to charities, something they wouldn’t be able to do if they weren’t successful in the first place.

Honestly I will never take someone complaining about capitalism over the Internet seriously. Because you are benefitting from it through whatever device you are using to complain about it. Do you not see the irony?

[fandomsandfeminism]

This is honestly so funny. I thought it was a sarcastic post for the first half of it.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/times-watchdog/minorities-exploited-by-warren-buffetts-mobile-home-empire-clayton-homes/

https://publicintegrity.org/business/warren-buffetts-mobile-home-empire-preys-on-the-poor/

Man, its such a good thing that Buffet exploited and preyed upon the poor to build a fortune because it lets him give to the poor. That’s definitely a good and flawless system.

But also:

[katelynnp7]

1) Could you maybe supply links that work please? I’m on mobile and can’t be fucked to copy the whole thing and delete it just to get to a website.

2) You didn’t acknowledge any other point, including the fact that these people worked their asses off (most likely harder than you have worked in a day in your life, but I digress) to get where they are going, had to employ other people (as in give others the opportunity to have a job and supply for their family) and were smart with what they did with their money (i.e put it back into their business or helped other people who wanted to create a business that benefitted others through investment, therefore helping another business create even more jobs).

3) Have you done anything at all besides complaining about it on Tumblr (a capitalist invention, by the way)? If not, my last point still stands.

4) You understand that taking their money from them simply because you believe they have to much is theft, right?

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. I’m on mobile too. Google search “Warren Buffett exploits the poor” if its too much trouble for you.

2. “Worked their asses off” my ass. His father was a congressman, and much of his fortune was made by exploiting others. And Employing other people isnt charity. Being a CEO isnt an act of kindness.

3. I’m sorry, what qualifications do you want exactly for my critisms to be valid in your illustrious eyes?

4. Taxation and labor regulations arent theft.

[katelynnp7]

1) The only website listed that spoke about “exploitation of the poor” was the second. And a lot of that could boiled down to not being smart with their own money. I know it sounds incredibly rash and a little mean, but if it’s all these people had to accept a massive loan to own a house, they should have at least done some shopping. This company has the highest interest rate by at least 6 points. You’re telling me they didn’t think to look at other places with lower rates? Furthermore if they are contracted a particular rate the company legally has to abide by that, and if they don’t they can sue them in court. And I understand that the company will have a team of lawyers, but if its in contract form, written and signed, there’s not many loopholes they could pull out of their ass that a judge will likely take. Unless theres something in the fine print, which you should always read.

2. You have yet to supply me with any evidence that he was exploiting anyone. And him reaping the benefits of his father’s (or his father’s father, we can keep going down the line if you want) labour isn’t a bad thing. He used that money in a way that would make him more money. Its called being smart with money.

I never stated employing other people was a form of charity. However it allows other people the ability to supply for their families. I have still yet to see how this is a bad thing.

3) Do I seriously need to be qualified to agree with my own opinion? It’s my opinion. You’re snarky answer has me feeling that my assertion is right, you’ve done nothing more than complain on Tumblr. Which I find hilarious because Tumblr is a capitalist invention. I don’t need to be qualified to find that funny.

4) Taxation for what, though? Simply having what the government deems to much money? I don’t know, taking money away from people simply because you don’t like the amount they are making sounds like theft to me.

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. This is the first paragraph of the first link: “Clayton Homes has used a pattern of deception to help extract billions from poor customers around the country — particularly people of color, who make up a substantial and growing portion of its business. ”

So. Like.

And, honestly, if you dont see how specifically targetting poor people, especially minorities, with predatory lending practices is exploitative, that seems like a personal issue. And blaming poor people for being misled into predatory lending situations seems, uh, pretty ignorant.

2. You literally responded to multiple sources about him exploiting people.

3. I asked you what MY qualifications needed to be for MY opinion to be valid. But again, this “tumblr is capitalist” argument is nonsense.

4. Property tax. Income tax. Inheritance tax. Asset tax. The same taxes we all pay, but, ya know, scaled up to account for their level of wealth. Which isnt theft. Its how society pays to maintain itself.

[katelynnp7]

1. Saying people should be educated before they make decisions which includes large amounts of money isn’t ignorant, its common sense, and should be taught in schools. And nothing has been found of any of these claims to be true, otherwise the company would be in a shit tone of trouble.

2. We haven’t agreed that it’s exploitation. Also, should I assume that you agree that companies are able to supply jobs for others which in turn allows them to supply for their families?

3. I apologised, I must have quickly read over that third point. In order to answer your question, pretty much anything other than complaining on a website that uses advertisement to keep it running. Or from a phone that was a capitalist invention.

4. Do you see what consequences that would have? What’s stopping those people from moving somewhere else where more beneficial for themselves and take their company with them, leaving thousands of people jobless?

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. You do know that subprime mortgage loans are what caused the 2009 financial crisis, right? Yeah, lots of people got very very rich fucking over poor people with predatory housing loans, wrecked our entire economy for several years and….basically got away with it.

2. If all workers are paid fairly at every level and it isnt exploiting customers as well.

3. “But you use a CAPITALIST PHONE!!!”

Do you know why I keep posting this?

4. “But if we ask rich people to pay taxes, they might leave and exploit some other country’s labor force!” I literally dont care

Rich people shouldn’t be exempt from taxes because they employ others. That’s fucking nonsense. That argument states that only the poor should have to pay taxes. The rich are above the law. Which is bullshit.

[katelynnp7]

1. I’m not going to take your word for it, I haven’t paid much attention to the US economic system, but I’ll do further research and come to my own conclusions. No offence to you but I don’t really trust many people, especially over the Internet.

2. Define fairly

3. You understand why I keep saying the same thing, yeah? You’re complaining about something, not doing anything about it and benefitting by using the very thing invented by the concept you’re complaining about. It’s the definition of irony.

4. I never once said anything about taxes in general. I’m speaking of a specific tax purely to inhibit billionaire status. And it’s great that you don’t care for those who would possibly lose their jobs simply because you hate rich people.

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. K. Well, point being that, uh, predatory housing loans are kinda a thing.

2. At least a living wage, in proportion to the value of their labor.

3. So you dont really understand the comic, eh? Cool cool. Ok.

So, let’s try this: a person can partake in a system and still think that system cam be improved. One does not need to abandon society for a self sustaining farm commune to have an opinion on society’s flaws.

4. I don’t think it’s ethical to have only the poor pay taxes because the ultra-rich can hold employment for a lot of people hostage.

I think a better economic set up would be a lot of smaller companies in a free but well regulated marketplace that all fairly pay their employees, rather than a tiny number of mega monopolies that can threaten the US economy if they aren’t given the tax breaks they want.

[katelynnp7]

1. Cheers, I’ll look into it.

2. We can partially agree on. I don’t think minimum wage (low skill) jobs are meant to supply a living wage. I think they’re supposed to give you a foundation of what the working world is like and assist in living expenses if needed, but not the primary income.

3. My apologies, I assumed you were a socialist/communist

4. Again, I never personally stated that the rich shouldn’t have to pay taxes. I think that’s idiotic. But I would love to know what you mean by well regulated. Because I don’t know about you, but to me the government doesn’t know how to do much right, if anything.

[fandomsandfeminism]

2. There is no “minimum wage rent” or “minimum wage groceries” labor is inherently worth a living wage. It IS the primary income for many people, like it or not.

3. I’m a democratic socialist who supports a basic income system, socialized necessities, and a well regulated marketplace. I think small, local, largely co-op based businesses are ideal for marketplace needs.

4. I’d trust the government, which can be held accountable by the populace, over private megacorps any day of the year.

[katelynnp7]

2. Would love for some sources if you don’t mind. Where I’m from low wage jobs are not seen as for living purposes. More for teenagers who want to start saving for a car and other expenses. It shouldn’t be seen as such. People should be asking for promotions or looking for jobs elsewhere if they feel they’re contribution isn’t taken seriously. Otherwise they’re stuck at the bottom.

3. Then my point stands. I am sorry but I have yet to see a socialist country, regardless of whether or not “democratic”, working anywhere in society and doesnt lead to people eating rats in the street. And I don’t think having a shit tone of “socialised safety nets” really teaches anyone about personal responsibility because the government will simply help them out. However, I wouldn’t argue against there needing to be some form of assistance, but nothing like completely free health care or college. Also, I think Bernie Sanders is kind of a massive idiot.

4. Assuming you’re in the US, would you trust your current government? Again, I don’t think any government could handle such a large responsibility. I personally believe that the smaller the government, the better. But its fine to agree to disagree.

[fandomsandfeminism]

2. You want sources that you don’t get a discount on rent and groceries if you are paid minimum wage?

Or sources that people live on minimum wage?

In 2017, 80.4 million workers age 16 and older in the United States were paid at hourly rates, representing 58.3 percent of all wage and salary workers. Among those paid by the hour, 542,000 workers earned exactly the prevailing federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. About 1.3 million had wages below the federal minimum. Together, these 1.8 million workers with wages at or below the federal minimum made up 2.3 percent of all hourly paid workers. Source: https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2017/home.htm

3. I don’t think “personal responsibility” is a good reason to allow people to die, and no one asked about Bernie. But I’m interested in why you think the Nordic countries are “eating rats in the street ” while 40 million Americans are food insecure. ( https://hungerandhealth.feedingamerica.org/understand-food-insecurity/ )

4. I don’t trust Trump with safety scissors and glue sticks, but I still think government regulation, which is subject to public oversight, is more trust worthy than ultracapitalist megacorporations.

[katelynnp7]

2. I meant sources for the claim that Labour is inherently worth a minumum wage, sorry I should have specified.

3. Would you mind listing these Nordic countries that are supposedly democratic socialist? Because the countries Sanders uses (I use him because he’s pretty much the face of the ideology in US at the moment) have come out and said specifically in response to him (if I remember correctly) that they are not socialist countries.

4. The public doesn’t too much besides vote who they want to represent them. Do you think there should be a national vote everytime the government wants to implement new law? Because that seems incredibly impractical to me.

[fandomsandfeminism]

2. It is my personal moral belief that all labor is worth a living wage, because the idea that someone should work full time and not make enough money to live is unethical and reeks of exploitation. I don’t know what sources you want for my moral and ethical beliefs.

3. Any source for that? Because the nordic countries have pretty heavily mixed economies with strong socialist safety nets. But nice dodge on America’s food insecurity numbers.

4. I literally didnt say that. You’re just making shit up.

[katelynnp7]

2. Then I think we should agree to disagree because we will be talking in circles due to morality being very subjective.

3. Here and I never said I was completely against the government helping out its people, especially those below the poverty line. I just don't think it's practical or sustainable to have everything pretty much handed out to people.

4. I never said you did. I was asking a legitimate question as to how you think that would work in practice.

[fandomsandfeminism]

Thought: I do NOT think that 50% of the world’s billionaires should be women. I think there shouldn’t be any billionaires at all.

[cranberrybogmummy]

So you are saying 0% of the world should be billionaires?

[fandomsandfeminism]

Yes.

[caosdth]

Why shouldn’t their be billionaires? That makes no sense.

[fandomsandfeminism]

Because the existence of billionaires is predicated on the exploitation of human labor and unsustainable environmental harm.  That level of wealth hoarding is harmful to economies, as it reduces the amount of money in circulation. No one person, no family, could ever conceivably even SPEND a billion dollars anyway, and  it is inherently immoral to accumulate wealth so narrowly while so much of the world lives in abject poverty.  

Better then to create a wealth ceiling, a point at which all wealth over a certain point  is taxed at or very near 100% to incentivize people to actually spend their money rather than hoard it, stimulating the economy and bettering the lives of far more people. Better even still to create and regulate economic systems that protect workers and the environment in a way that such extreme levels of wealth accumulation aren’t even feasible. 

[aflawedmind]

The problem with this is that it reduces the incentive to actually do fiscally well. What’s the point of starting a business if you can’t become wealthy?

[fandomsandfeminism]

There is a very real difference between “reasonably wealthy” and A BILLIONAIRE

[twodotsknowwhy]

No one is saying you shouldn’t have a nice house, we are saying that having multiple really, really ridiculously nice houses while your employees are either homeless or at serious risk of becoming homeless is immoral.

[whenandwhereienter]

I’ll never understand why this concept is hard for people. I think it’s because they can’t actually fathom how much $1 Billion is.

[fandomsandfeminism]

Seriously.

Let’s say you have a badass job. A great job. You make $100 AN HOUR. You work 10 hours a day ($1000 A DAY), 5 days a week ($5000 a week!!!), every week ($20,000 A MONTH), thats $240,000 Every Year.

It would take you 4,167 years to make a billion dollars.

[demonikolai]

God dammit

[postilionstruckbylightning]

If you were making, for the sake of argument, $25 million a year, you could live a life of extreme luxury. Even then, it would take you forty years of spending none of that money to amass a single billion. There are multi-billionaires out there. No one needs that kind of money.

[iamthecutestofborg]

Currency came into existence to simplify trade. It was meant to make things easier and better for society. When a single person has more than they need, even more than they would need for an extravagant lifestyle, they’d completely unreasonable. Money isn’t meant to be hoarded for status. I honestly think billionaires are addicted to money.

[katelynnp7]

You know billionaires only got rich because they cam up with an idea that helped millions upon millions of people and employed hundreds and thousands of people to make their idea a reality, right?

Why should you take away the money that these people worked hard to get and were smart with how they spent it? You know that’s theft right? And who are you to dictate how much is too much in earnings?

And billionaires such as Warren Buffet have given BILLIONS of dollars to charities, something they wouldn’t be able to do if they weren’t successful in the first place.

Honestly I will never take someone complaining about capitalism over the Internet seriously. Because you are benefitting from it through whatever device you are using to complain about it. Do you not see the irony?

[fandomsandfeminism]

This is honestly so funny. I thought it was a sarcastic post for the first half of it.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/times-watchdog/minorities-exploited-by-warren-buffetts-mobile-home-empire-clayton-homes/

https://publicintegrity.org/business/warren-buffetts-mobile-home-empire-preys-on-the-poor/

Man, its such a good thing that Buffet exploited and preyed upon the poor to build a fortune because it lets him give to the poor. That’s definitely a good and flawless system.

But also:

[katelynnp7]

1) Could you maybe supply links that work please? I’m on mobile and can’t be fucked to copy the whole thing and delete it just to get to a website.

2) You didn’t acknowledge any other point, including the fact that these people worked their asses off (most likely harder than you have worked in a day in your life, but I digress) to get where they are going, had to employ other people (as in give others the opportunity to have a job and supply for their family) and were smart with what they did with their money (i.e put it back into their business or helped other people who wanted to create a business that benefitted others through investment, therefore helping another business create even more jobs).

3) Have you done anything at all besides complaining about it on Tumblr (a capitalist invention, by the way)? If not, my last point still stands.

4) You understand that taking their money from them simply because you believe they have to much is theft, right?

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. I’m on mobile too. Google search “Warren Buffett exploits the poor” if its too much trouble for you.

2. “Worked their asses off” my ass. His father was a congressman, and much of his fortune was made by exploiting others. And Employing other people isnt charity. Being a CEO isnt an act of kindness.

3. I’m sorry, what qualifications do you want exactly for my critisms to be valid in your illustrious eyes?

4. Taxation and labor regulations arent theft.

[katelynnp7]

1) The only website listed that spoke about “exploitation of the poor” was the second. And a lot of that could boiled down to not being smart with their own money. I know it sounds incredibly rash and a little mean, but if it’s all these people had to accept a massive loan to own a house, they should have at least done some shopping. This company has the highest interest rate by at least 6 points. You’re telling me they didn’t think to look at other places with lower rates? Furthermore if they are contracted a particular rate the company legally has to abide by that, and if they don’t they can sue them in court. And I understand that the company will have a team of lawyers, but if its in contract form, written and signed, there’s not many loopholes they could pull out of their ass that a judge will likely take. Unless theres something in the fine print, which you should always read.

2. You have yet to supply me with any evidence that he was exploiting anyone. And him reaping the benefits of his father’s (or his father’s father, we can keep going down the line if you want) labour isn’t a bad thing. He used that money in a way that would make him more money. Its called being smart with money.

I never stated employing other people was a form of charity. However it allows other people the ability to supply for their families. I have still yet to see how this is a bad thing.

3) Do I seriously need to be qualified to agree with my own opinion? It’s my opinion. You’re snarky answer has me feeling that my assertion is right, you’ve done nothing more than complain on Tumblr. Which I find hilarious because Tumblr is a capitalist invention. I don’t need to be qualified to find that funny.

4) Taxation for what, though? Simply having what the government deems to much money? I don’t know, taking money away from people simply because you don’t like the amount they are making sounds like theft to me.

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. This is the first paragraph of the first link: “Clayton Homes has used a pattern of deception to help extract billions from poor customers around the country — particularly people of color, who make up a substantial and growing portion of its business. ”

So. Like.

And, honestly, if you dont see how specifically targetting poor people, especially minorities, with predatory lending practices is exploitative, that seems like a personal issue. And blaming poor people for being misled into predatory lending situations seems, uh, pretty ignorant.

2. You literally responded to multiple sources about him exploiting people.

3. I asked you what MY qualifications needed to be for MY opinion to be valid. But again, this “tumblr is capitalist” argument is nonsense.

4. Property tax. Income tax. Inheritance tax. Asset tax. The same taxes we all pay, but, ya know, scaled up to account for their level of wealth. Which isnt theft. Its how society pays to maintain itself.

[katelynnp7]

1. Saying people should be educated before they make decisions which includes large amounts of money isn’t ignorant, its common sense, and should be taught in schools. And nothing has been found of any of these claims to be true, otherwise the company would be in a shit tone of trouble.

2. We haven’t agreed that it’s exploitation. Also, should I assume that you agree that companies are able to supply jobs for others which in turn allows them to supply for their families?

3. I apologised, I must have quickly read over that third point. In order to answer your question, pretty much anything other than complaining on a website that uses advertisement to keep it running. Or from a phone that was a capitalist invention.

4. Do you see what consequences that would have? What’s stopping those people from moving somewhere else where more beneficial for themselves and take their company with them, leaving thousands of people jobless?

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. You do know that subprime mortgage loans are what caused the 2009 financial crisis, right? Yeah, lots of people got very very rich fucking over poor people with predatory housing loans, wrecked our entire economy for several years and….basically got away with it.

2. If all workers are paid fairly at every level and it isnt exploiting customers as well.

3. “But you use a CAPITALIST PHONE!!!”

Do you know why I keep posting this?

4. “But if we ask rich people to pay taxes, they might leave and exploit some other country’s labor force!” I literally dont care

Rich people shouldn’t be exempt from taxes because they employ others. That’s fucking nonsense. That argument states that only the poor should have to pay taxes. The rich are above the law. Which is bullshit.

[katelynnp7]

1. I’m not going to take your word for it, I haven’t paid much attention to the US economic system, but I’ll do further research and come to my own conclusions. No offence to you but I don’t really trust many people, especially over the Internet.

2. Define fairly

3. You understand why I keep saying the same thing, yeah? You’re complaining about something, not doing anything about it and benefitting by using the very thing invented by the concept you’re complaining about. It’s the definition of irony.

4. I never once said anything about taxes in general. I’m speaking of a specific tax purely to inhibit billionaire status. And it’s great that you don’t care for those who would possibly lose their jobs simply because you hate rich people.

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. K. Well, point being that, uh, predatory housing loans are kinda a thing.

2. At least a living wage, in proportion to the value of their labor.

3. So you dont really understand the comic, eh? Cool cool. Ok.

So, let’s try this: a person can partake in a system and still think that system cam be improved. One does not need to abandon society for a self sustaining farm commune to have an opinion on society’s flaws.

4. I don’t think it’s ethical to have only the poor pay taxes because the ultra-rich can hold employment for a lot of people hostage.

I think a better economic set up would be a lot of smaller companies in a free but well regulated marketplace that all fairly pay their employees, rather than a tiny number of mega monopolies that can threaten the US economy if they aren’t given the tax breaks they want.

[katelynnp7]

1. Cheers, I’ll look into it.

2. We can partially agree on. I don’t think minimum wage (low skill) jobs are meant to supply a living wage. I think they’re supposed to give you a foundation of what the working world is like and assist in living expenses if needed, but not the primary income.

3. My apologies, I assumed you were a socialist/communist

4. Again, I never personally stated that the rich shouldn’t have to pay taxes. I think that’s idiotic. But I would love to know what you mean by well regulated. Because I don’t know about you, but to me the government doesn’t know how to do much right, if anything.

[fandomsandfeminism]

2. There is no “minimum wage rent” or “minimum wage groceries” labor is inherently worth a living wage. It IS the primary income for many people, like it or not.

3. I’m a democratic socialist who supports a basic income system, socialized necessities, and a well regulated marketplace. I think small, local, largely co-op based businesses are ideal for marketplace needs.

4. I’d trust the government, which can be held accountable by the populace, over private megacorps any day of the year.

[katelynnp7]

2. Would love for some sources if you don’t mind. Where I’m from low wage jobs are not seen as for living purposes. More for teenagers who want to start saving for a car and other expenses. It shouldn’t be seen as such. People should be asking for promotions or looking for jobs elsewhere if they feel they’re contribution isn’t taken seriously. Otherwise they’re stuck at the bottom.

3. Then my point stands. I am sorry but I have yet to see a socialist country, regardless of whether or not “democratic”, working anywhere in society and doesnt lead to people eating rats in the street. And I don’t think having a shit tone of “socialised safety nets” really teaches anyone about personal responsibility because the government will simply help them out. However, I wouldn’t argue against there needing to be some form of assistance, but nothing like completely free health care or college. Also, I think Bernie Sanders is kind of a massive idiot.

4. Assuming you’re in the US, would you trust your current government? Again, I don’t think any government could handle such a large responsibility. I personally believe that the smaller the government, the better. But its fine to agree to disagree.

[fandomsandfeminism]

2. You want sources that you don’t get a discount on rent and groceries if you are paid minimum wage?

Or sources that people live on minimum wage?

In 2017, 80.4 million workers age 16 and older in the United States were paid at hourly rates, representing 58.3 percent of all wage and salary workers. Among those paid by the hour, 542,000 workers earned exactly the prevailing federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. About 1.3 million had wages below the federal minimum. Together, these 1.8 million workers with wages at or below the federal minimum made up 2.3 percent of all hourly paid workers. Source: https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2017/home.htm

3. I don’t think “personal responsibility” is a good reason to allow people to die, and no one asked about Bernie. But I’m interested in why you think the Nordic countries are “eating rats in the street ” while 40 million Americans are food insecure. ( https://hungerandhealth.feedingamerica.org/understand-food-insecurity/ )

4. I don’t trust Trump with safety scissors and glue sticks, but I still think government regulation, which is subject to public oversight, is more trust worthy than ultracapitalist megacorporations.

[katelynnp7]

2. I meant sources for the claim that Labour is inherently worth a minumum wage, sorry I should have specified.

3. Would you mind listing these Nordic countries that are supposedly democratic socialist? Because the countries Sanders uses (I use him because he's pretty much the face of the ideology in US at the moment) have come out and said specifically in response to him (if I remember correctly) that they are not socialist countries.

4. The public doesn't too much besides vote who they want to represent them. Do you think there should be a national vote everytime the government wants to implement new law? Because that seems incredibly impractical to me.

[fandomsandfeminism]

Thought: I do NOT think that 50% of the world’s billionaires should be women. I think there shouldn’t be any billionaires at all.

[cranberrybogmummy]

So you are saying 0% of the world should be billionaires?

[fandomsandfeminism]

Yes.

[caosdth]

Why shouldn’t their be billionaires? That makes no sense.

[fandomsandfeminism]

Because the existence of billionaires is predicated on the exploitation of human labor and unsustainable environmental harm.  That level of wealth hoarding is harmful to economies, as it reduces the amount of money in circulation. No one person, no family, could ever conceivably even SPEND a billion dollars anyway, and  it is inherently immoral to accumulate wealth so narrowly while so much of the world lives in abject poverty.  

Better then to create a wealth ceiling, a point at which all wealth over a certain point  is taxed at or very near 100% to incentivize people to actually spend their money rather than hoard it, stimulating the economy and bettering the lives of far more people. Better even still to create and regulate economic systems that protect workers and the environment in a way that such extreme levels of wealth accumulation aren’t even feasible. 

[aflawedmind]

The problem with this is that it reduces the incentive to actually do fiscally well. What’s the point of starting a business if you can’t become wealthy?

[fandomsandfeminism]

There is a very real difference between “reasonably wealthy” and A BILLIONAIRE

[twodotsknowwhy]

No one is saying you shouldn’t have a nice house, we are saying that having multiple really, really ridiculously nice houses while your employees are either homeless or at serious risk of becoming homeless is immoral.

[whenandwhereienter]

I’ll never understand why this concept is hard for people. I think it’s because they can’t actually fathom how much $1 Billion is.

[fandomsandfeminism]

Seriously.

Let’s say you have a badass job. A great job. You make $100 AN HOUR. You work 10 hours a day ($1000 A DAY), 5 days a week ($5000 a week!!!), every week ($20,000 A MONTH), thats $240,000 Every Year.

It would take you 4,167 years to make a billion dollars.

[demonikolai]

God dammit

[postilionstruckbylightning]

If you were making, for the sake of argument, $25 million a year, you could live a life of extreme luxury. Even then, it would take you forty years of spending none of that money to amass a single billion. There are multi-billionaires out there. No one needs that kind of money.

[iamthecutestofborg]

Currency came into existence to simplify trade. It was meant to make things easier and better for society. When a single person has more than they need, even more than they would need for an extravagant lifestyle, they’d completely unreasonable. Money isn’t meant to be hoarded for status. I honestly think billionaires are addicted to money.

[katelynnp7]

You know billionaires only got rich because they cam up with an idea that helped millions upon millions of people and employed hundreds and thousands of people to make their idea a reality, right?

Why should you take away the money that these people worked hard to get and were smart with how they spent it? You know that’s theft right? And who are you to dictate how much is too much in earnings?

And billionaires such as Warren Buffet have given BILLIONS of dollars to charities, something they wouldn’t be able to do if they weren’t successful in the first place.

Honestly I will never take someone complaining about capitalism over the Internet seriously. Because you are benefitting from it through whatever device you are using to complain about it. Do you not see the irony?

[fandomsandfeminism]

This is honestly so funny. I thought it was a sarcastic post for the first half of it.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/times-watchdog/minorities-exploited-by-warren-buffetts-mobile-home-empire-clayton-homes/

https://publicintegrity.org/business/warren-buffetts-mobile-home-empire-preys-on-the-poor/

Man, its such a good thing that Buffet exploited and preyed upon the poor to build a fortune because it lets him give to the poor. That’s definitely a good and flawless system.

But also:

[katelynnp7]

1) Could you maybe supply links that work please? I’m on mobile and can’t be fucked to copy the whole thing and delete it just to get to a website.

2) You didn’t acknowledge any other point, including the fact that these people worked their asses off (most likely harder than you have worked in a day in your life, but I digress) to get where they are going, had to employ other people (as in give others the opportunity to have a job and supply for their family) and were smart with what they did with their money (i.e put it back into their business or helped other people who wanted to create a business that benefitted others through investment, therefore helping another business create even more jobs).

3) Have you done anything at all besides complaining about it on Tumblr (a capitalist invention, by the way)? If not, my last point still stands.

4) You understand that taking their money from them simply because you believe they have to much is theft, right?

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. I’m on mobile too. Google search “Warren Buffett exploits the poor” if its too much trouble for you.

2. “Worked their asses off” my ass. His father was a congressman, and much of his fortune was made by exploiting others. And Employing other people isnt charity. Being a CEO isnt an act of kindness.

3. I’m sorry, what qualifications do you want exactly for my critisms to be valid in your illustrious eyes?

4. Taxation and labor regulations arent theft.

[katelynnp7]

1) The only website listed that spoke about “exploitation of the poor” was the second. And a lot of that could boiled down to not being smart with their own money. I know it sounds incredibly rash and a little mean, but if it’s all these people had to accept a massive loan to own a house, they should have at least done some shopping. This company has the highest interest rate by at least 6 points. You’re telling me they didn’t think to look at other places with lower rates? Furthermore if they are contracted a particular rate the company legally has to abide by that, and if they don’t they can sue them in court. And I understand that the company will have a team of lawyers, but if its in contract form, written and signed, there’s not many loopholes they could pull out of their ass that a judge will likely take. Unless theres something in the fine print, which you should always read.

2. You have yet to supply me with any evidence that he was exploiting anyone. And him reaping the benefits of his father’s (or his father’s father, we can keep going down the line if you want) labour isn’t a bad thing. He used that money in a way that would make him more money. Its called being smart with money.

I never stated employing other people was a form of charity. However it allows other people the ability to supply for their families. I have still yet to see how this is a bad thing.

3) Do I seriously need to be qualified to agree with my own opinion? It’s my opinion. You’re snarky answer has me feeling that my assertion is right, you’ve done nothing more than complain on Tumblr. Which I find hilarious because Tumblr is a capitalist invention. I don’t need to be qualified to find that funny.

4) Taxation for what, though? Simply having what the government deems to much money? I don’t know, taking money away from people simply because you don’t like the amount they are making sounds like theft to me.

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. This is the first paragraph of the first link: “Clayton Homes has used a pattern of deception to help extract billions from poor customers around the country — particularly people of color, who make up a substantial and growing portion of its business. ”

So. Like.

And, honestly, if you dont see how specifically targetting poor people, especially minorities, with predatory lending practices is exploitative, that seems like a personal issue. And blaming poor people for being misled into predatory lending situations seems, uh, pretty ignorant.

2. You literally responded to multiple sources about him exploiting people.

3. I asked you what MY qualifications needed to be for MY opinion to be valid. But again, this “tumblr is capitalist” argument is nonsense.

4. Property tax. Income tax. Inheritance tax. Asset tax. The same taxes we all pay, but, ya know, scaled up to account for their level of wealth. Which isnt theft. Its how society pays to maintain itself.

[katelynnp7]

1. Saying people should be educated before they make decisions which includes large amounts of money isn’t ignorant, its common sense, and should be taught in schools. And nothing has been found of any of these claims to be true, otherwise the company would be in a shit tone of trouble.

2. We haven’t agreed that it’s exploitation. Also, should I assume that you agree that companies are able to supply jobs for others which in turn allows them to supply for their families?

3. I apologised, I must have quickly read over that third point. In order to answer your question, pretty much anything other than complaining on a website that uses advertisement to keep it running. Or from a phone that was a capitalist invention.

4. Do you see what consequences that would have? What’s stopping those people from moving somewhere else where more beneficial for themselves and take their company with them, leaving thousands of people jobless?

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. You do know that subprime mortgage loans are what caused the 2009 financial crisis, right? Yeah, lots of people got very very rich fucking over poor people with predatory housing loans, wrecked our entire economy for several years and….basically got away with it.

2. If all workers are paid fairly at every level and it isnt exploiting customers as well.

3. “But you use a CAPITALIST PHONE!!!”

Do you know why I keep posting this?

4. “But if we ask rich people to pay taxes, they might leave and exploit some other country’s labor force!” I literally dont care

Rich people shouldn’t be exempt from taxes because they employ others. That’s fucking nonsense. That argument states that only the poor should have to pay taxes. The rich are above the law. Which is bullshit.

[katelynnp7]

1. I’m not going to take your word for it, I haven’t paid much attention to the US economic system, but I’ll do further research and come to my own conclusions. No offence to you but I don’t really trust many people, especially over the Internet.

2. Define fairly

3. You understand why I keep saying the same thing, yeah? You’re complaining about something, not doing anything about it and benefitting by using the very thing invented by the concept you’re complaining about. It’s the definition of irony.

4. I never once said anything about taxes in general. I’m speaking of a specific tax purely to inhibit billionaire status. And it’s great that you don’t care for those who would possibly lose their jobs simply because you hate rich people.

[fandomsandfeminism]

1. K. Well, point being that, uh, predatory housing loans are kinda a thing.

2. At least a living wage, in proportion to the value of their labor.

3. So you dont really understand the comic, eh? Cool cool. Ok.

So, let’s try this: a person can partake in a system and still think that system cam be improved. One does not need to abandon society for a self sustaining farm commune to have an opinion on society’s flaws.

4. I don’t think it’s ethical to have only the poor pay taxes because the ultra-rich can hold employment for a lot of people hostage.

I think a better economic set up would be a lot of smaller companies in a free but well regulated marketplace that all fairly pay their employees, rather than a tiny number of mega monopolies that can threaten the US economy if they aren’t given the tax breaks they want.

[katelynnp7]

1. Cheers, I’ll look into it.

2. We can partially agree on. I don’t think minimum wage (low skill) jobs are meant to supply a living wage. I think they’re supposed to give you a foundation of what the working world is like and assist in living expenses if needed, but not the primary income.

3. My apologies, I assumed you were a socialist/communist

4. Again, I never personally stated that the rich shouldn’t have to pay taxes. I think that’s idiotic. But I would love to know what you mean by well regulated. Because I don’t know about you, but to me the government doesn’t know how to do much right, if anything.

[fandomsandfeminism]

2. There is no “minimum wage rent” or “minimum wage groceries” labor is inherently worth a living wage. It IS the primary income for many people, like it or not.

3. I’m a democratic socialist who supports a basic income system, socialized necessities, and a well regulated marketplace. I think small, local, largely co-op based businesses are ideal for marketplace needs.

4. I’d trust the government, which can be held accountable by the populace, over private megacorps any day of the year.

[katelynnp7]

2. Would love for some sources if you don't mind. Where I'm from low wage jobs are not seen as for living purposes. More for teenagers who want to start saving for a car and other expenses. It shouldn't be seen as such. People should be asking for promotions or looking for jobs elsewhere if they feel they're contribution isn't taken seriously. Otherwise they're stuck at the bottom.

3. Then my point stands. I am sorry but I have yet to see a socialist country, regardless of whether or not "democratic", working anywhere in society and doesnt lead to people eating rats in the street. And I don't think having a shit tone of "socialised safety nets" really teaches anyone about personal responsibility because the government will simply help them out. However, I wouldn't argue against there needing to be some form of assistance, but nothing like completely free health care or college. Also, I think Bernie Sanders is kind of a massive idiot.

4. Assuming you're in the US, would you trust your current government? Again, I don't think any government could handle such a large responsibility. I personally believe that the smaller the government, the better. But its fine to agree to disagree.