Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Billionaires are evil

Is that not the name of brand of lager?
I remember that...god it was the most awfull weak piss, a pint of that made you think Heineken was decent

ETA I was mostly frequenting small welsh village pubs at the time though and they didnt get regularr visits from the ministry of not watering down and adding sheep piss inspectors
 
I remember that...god it was the most awfull weak piss, a pint of that made you think Heineken was decent

ETA I was mostly frequenting small welsh village pubs at the time though and they didnt get regularr visits from the ministry of not watering down and adding sheep piss inspectors
Which reminds me that one of the changes in British culture in my lifetime has been the switch from bitter to lager.
 
Light and bitter. Last heard of in the 80s when my dad used to drink it. He switched to lager in the 90s.
 
The Texas Billionaire Who Has Greenpeace USA on the Verge of Bankruptcy
WSJ. Sept. 8, 2024 https://archive.is/rKvkN
Warren sees green activists, who he once said should be “removed from the gene pool,” as a serious threat to the industry. Starting with protests of Keystone XL, which successfully derailed that project, activists have targeted pipelines across the country.
“Everybody is afraid of these environmental groups and the fear that it may look wrong if you fight back with these people,” Warren said in a 2017 TV interview. “But what they did to us is wrong, and they’re gonna pay for it.”
Now the pugnacious tycoon, who is valued at more than $7 billion, is within spitting distance of dealing a serious blow to Greenpeace—and the U.S. green movement.
Energy Transfer’s lawsuit alleges several Greenpeace entities incited the Dakota Access protests, funded attacks to damage the pipeline, and spread misinformation about the company and its project. The case is set for trial in February in a North Dakota state court, where both sides expect a fossil-fuel-friendly jury. Energy Transfer is seeking $300 million in damages, which would likely wipe out Greenpeace USA, according to the group’s leadership.
Deepa Padmanabha, Greenpeace USA’s acting co-executive director, said the lawsuit is “an existential threat” to the group.
In court papers, Greenpeace says it played a limited role in the protests, which it says were organized by Native American groups, and never took part in any property destruction or violence.
The litigation is unlikely to affect Greenpeace’s international operations. While the Greenpeace network’s coordinating body in the Netherlands is also a defendant, Energy Transfer may struggle to enforce any award against it because it doesn’t own assets in the U.S. But Greenpeace says losing its affiliate—and influence—in the U.S. would have a profound impact on the group’s ability to address climate change.
 
Here's the old "you're poor because you buy takeout coffee" again:

"Shark Tank" star Kevin O'Leary isn't known to mince words, and his take on workers splurging on their daily cups of coffee and work lunches was no exception.

"Stop buying coffee for $5.50. You got to work and spend $15 on a sandwich – what are you, an idiot?" O'Leary, also known as Mr. Wonderful, said in a financial advice clip shared on Instagram last week.

"It costs 99 cents to make a sandwich at home and bring it with you," he continued, "You start to add that up every day, it's a ton of money. Most people, particularly working in metropolitan cities, are just starting on their job, making their first $60,000, [and they] piss away about $15,000 a year on stupid stuff, and that's what they should stop doing."


I buy takeout coffee on days that I work. It adds up to about $5 a week.
 
Here's the old "you're poor because you buy takeout coffee" again:




I buy takeout coffee on days that I work. It adds up to about $5 a week.
???, From a UK perspective that would get you maybe 1 1/2 cups a week ..2 max.
I dont know the context of that quote from the shark bloke, but he does have a point to some extent, people do spend silly amounts on crap that has a ridiculous markup and coffee shops really are taking the piss (well over here in the UK anyway, sounds like you must be getting a better deal)
 
Here's the old "you're poor because you buy takeout coffee" again:




I buy takeout coffee on days that I work. It adds up to about $5 a week.
???, From a UK perspective that would get you maybe 1 1/2 cups a week ..2 max.
I dont know the context of that quote from the shark bloke, but he does have a point to some extent, people do spend silly amounts on crap that has a ridiculous markup and coffee shops really are taking the piss (well over here in the UK anyway, sounds like you must be getting a better deal)

Saving $5 a week, it would only take you 1,538,461.5 years to save enough to match O'Leary's estimated net worth. Massive wealth inequality is not caused by people buying their coffee from Starbucks instead of making it at home. Such expenditures are absolutely trivial compared to the massive scale of hoarding and theft being done by rich pieces of shit.
 
???, From a UK perspective that would get you maybe 1 1/2 cups a week ..2 max.
I dont know the context of that quote from the shark bloke, but he does have a point to some extent, people do spend silly amounts on crap that has a ridiculous markup and coffee shops really are taking the piss (well over here in the UK anyway, sounds like you must be getting a better deal)

I bring my own to-go cup, which cuts the price in half. Then, I have a loyalty card that gives me a free coffee a week. I'm also nice to the staff and they give me a free cup now and then just because. I don't know anyone who shells out $15,000 a year on crap purchases. Rent is so much that there's no space in anyone's budget that makes $60,000 a year. Even in my po-dunk town the average rent is $1,400 a month, with the average salary well below $60K. If you've ever had a crappy job, you'd know that buying a cup of coffee now and then makes life a bit more tolerable. In no way does it make up for the way the management class has tamped down on wages (and committed wage theft) since the mid-70s.
 
Anyhow, who gets $60,000 on their first job? These cunts know nothing of people’s lives yet have the front to lecture them on what they should and shouldn’t be doing.
 

Palantir and Anduril join forces with tech groups to bid for Pentagon contracts
Consortium likely to include Elon Musk’s SpaceX in move to grab a bigger slice of $850bn US defence budget
FT 22/12/24
Palantir and Anduril, two of the largest US defence technology companies, are in talks with about a dozen competitors to form a consortium that will jointly bid for US government work in an effort to disrupt the country’s oligopoly of “prime” contractors.
The consortium is planning to announce as early as January that it has reached agreements with a number of tech groups. Companies in talks to join include Elon Musk’s SpaceX, ChatGPT maker OpenAI, autonomous shipbuilder Saronic, and artificial intelligence data group Scale AI, according to several people with knowledge of the matter.
 
Last edited:
The Brookings Institution is a nonprofit public policy organization based in Washington, DC.

Are the very rich taking over American politics?
The Brookings Institution. Elaine Kamarck and Jordan Muchnick. January 9, 2025
The richest man in the world now sits close to the President elect and uses his powerful social media platform, X, to opine on everything from daylight savings time to visas for skilled workers. As the new administration takes shape, the number of multi-millionaires and billionaires moving to Washington grows. While this is good for Washington area real estate agents, is it good for democracy? Will someone who earns $14 million per day be able to appreciate how important $1,976.00 (the average monthly social security payment) is to millions of Americans?

We are right to worry about the uber-rich having too much influence. It is therefore important to look at whether those who are actually elected and thus the final decision makers have lives that are closer to the average American. One way to look at this is to track the number of people who have run for office and who have made significant contributions to their campaigns out of their own pockets. To do this we used data collected by OpenSecrets to count every presidential, congressional, and senate candidate in a primary or general election who contributed $1 million or more to their campaigns from their personal funds in the years 2018 to 2024. Only a very small fraction of Americans can give this much money to a campaign; especially given that the average net worth of an American is $1,063,700.
Better late than never. "$14 million per day"
 
Back
Top Bottom