Truly and honestly think about how bad rich people are with their money. It's literally insane to be that bad at something you're famous for.
This brought to you by the $120 million that Elon Musk has given the Fascist.
@RickiTarr people talk about how poor people are poor because they're bad at managing money but rich people aren't actually any better with money they just can afford to waste money without having to worry if they'll still have a roof over their head
if anything I think poor people are better at managing money because they know they have to make the most out of the little bit they have
@waitworry @RickiTarr "I'm obviously a good driver, my car has no dents in it because it's never been in a crash."
"When did you buy it?"
"Last month."
"Why did you buy a new car last month?"
"I crashed the last one."
@waitworry Yes, the poorer you are, the smarter you have to be about money just to survive.
OTOH, the system babies affluent people: they just invest their surplus wealth in well-regulated financial instruments and it earns even more money (with minimal risk), while various specialists take a commission to do the thinking for them.
That's not an option for much of the world's population. This book is a bit old now, but still interesting:
(1/2)
@david_megginson
> the poorer you are, the smarter you have to be about money just to survive
100%. Which is why Indymedia, a global media network set up by anarchists and other broke malcontents, was able to run our operations on the smell of any oily rag. I'd wager the Washington Post website costs more to run in a month than we spent on the entire Indymedia tech infrastructure in a decade.
(2/2)
Of course there is the embarrassing fact that the Washington Post still exists, whereas much of that Indymedia infrastructure no longer does. Mainly because it relied 100% on volunteers. I reckon there's a sweet spot between the 2 extremes (corporate media and broke media), and it looks something like platform cooperatives;