They are giving Luigi the death penalty

[puporing]

And also not everyone wants to have employees, there are lots of small business people and freelancers who just work for themselves. It's not a "requirement" that to survive in this world you have to either be a CEO or an employee, there are some other options.

[Something Funny]

On 2/23/2025 at 8:15 PM, Leo Gura said:

Laxness itself is the crime.

Laxness on murderers eventually leads to laxness on corruption, laxness on white collar crime, laxness on guys like Trump. It's a culture of laxness which allows corruption to run amok.

This doesn't seem to align with actual data though. 

What do you think about the fact that 9 out of 10 least corrupt countries (according to the CPI index that you've shared yourself) have abolished the death penalty?

[yetineti]

@Something Funny

21 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

Why does it matter to you how companies handle their finances? This shouldn't matter as long as there is no tax evasion or other illegal practices.

Because companies do not exist in a vacuum.

Quote

Most companies goal is to make profits for shareholders and to be as efficient as possible.

That’s a choice, not a law of nature.

Quote

So even if they stopped paying millions to CEOs and instead used AI that does CEO's work for free, those extra money still wouldn't go to you.

This is incredibly defeatist. It has nothing to with anyone getting free money or even CEOs in particular. It’s about structural inequity.   There are countless ways to better allocate funds.

Quote

If you think that your company is paying you unfairly, you should leave them and work elsewhere or create your own company, that treats ordinary workers better.

People do leave when they can. But also some jobs are essential. And if everyone just quit because they were feeling unfairly treated… essential industries would break… At a certain point things must be rebuilt from the inside out. You cannot just tear down and move around whatever doesn’t work.

Quote

Otherwise, you are enabling them by providing them with cheap, underpaid labour.

And does a woman enable a rapist with her dress in your world too, I suppose?

Edited 11 hours ago by yetineti

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, Emerald said:

It's a fair question to ask to probe at your worldview. That's why a few people have approached you with that question.

You did say before that some people are more valuable than others because of what they produce for the collective. And that the law should reflect that hierarchical understanding of human value.

And many disabled people and old people aren't able to provide a lot of value to the collective. They might actually need to extract value from the collective.

So, you either believe that disabled people and elders are less valuable than the average person... or the hierarchical understanding of your worldview is inconsistent and you haven't fully thought it through.

It has to be one or the other.

This is a discussion about how to handle murderers. Disabled people are irrelevant here.

I can't believe you guys force me to explicate this.

Edited 11 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Leo Gura]

15 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

This doesn't seem to align with actual data though. 

What do you think about the fact that 9 out of 10 least corrupt countries (according to the CPI index that you've shared yourself) have abolished the death penalty?

I say they waste a lot resources babysitting murderers. And beware of fascist backlash.

[Davino]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Pay is relative to what you build. If you shit out diamonds then $10M salary is underpayment.

You are like a mouse complaining that the elephant eats so much.

You should get payed for that wisdom

[Something Funny]

2 minutes ago, yetineti said:

Because companies do not exist in a vacuum.

Quote

2 minutes ago, yetineti said:

That’s a choice, not a law of nature.

Quote

And?

2 minutes ago, yetineti said:

This is incredibly defeatist. It has nothing to with anyone getting free money or even CEOs in particular. It’s about structural inequity.   There are countless ways to better allocate funds.

Quote

It's what would actually happen. The only reason why your average company isn't paying you less money or is paying you more money is because they can't. Either due to the market conditions or government regulations.

I don't see what's so defeatist about stating the facts. 

4 minutes ago, yetineti said:

People do leave when they can. Not being able to leave is a feature not a bug. But also some jobs are essential. And if everyone just quit because they were feeling unfairly treated… essential industries would break… some people are not only stuck but see the value in their work is behind not having good insurance… they feel good about their work and often times are punished for it when they do need insurance.. that wasn’t given. At a certain point things must be rebuilt. Inside out. You can not just tear down and move around whatever doesn’t work.

Quote

It's responsibility of the government to make sure that people are not treated unfairly and are paid enough money. You can't give that decision to individual companies and then just try to moralize to them and cry how evil they are for paying their CEOs millions of dollars.

Even the CEO salary issue could be systemically resolved by simply introducing a 100% tax over a certain net worth level.

7 minutes ago, yetineti said:

And does a woman enable a rapist with her dress in your world too, I suppose?

How is this in any way relevant? A company is not some rapist who attacks you in a dark alley. You are willingly getting employed there, with all the terms laid out in front of you beforehand and usually work there for many years.

[yetineti]

4 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

This is a discussion about how to handle murderers. Disabled people are irrelevant here.

I can't believe you guys force me to explicate this.

Boo-hoo. All of your comments haven’t been exactly ‘relevant’ and you do not get to gate keep what is. If it’s here: it’s relevant. Besides it wasn’t the most off topic, painful comparison known to man. It’d be better to just address it. Make us look dumb that way.

Edited 11 hours ago by yetineti

[Leo Gura]

1 minute ago, Davino said:

You should get payed for that wisdom

I am underpaid.

[yetineti]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

I am underpaid.

Maybe you should learn business, then criticize 😘

[Something Funny]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

And beware of fascist backlash.

Do you mind elaborating on this?

[Leo Gura]

42 minutes ago, yetineti said:

I do not care about business. And for that reason, I will inherently understand it better than you.

This is such a delusional idea.

This is exactly why I used this thread to push you lefties, to challenge your comfortable assumptions.

I wanted this to be a sort of rude awakening for you, but you are in no mood for that. You would rather waste time trying to debate me.

Edited 11 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Leo Gura]

3 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

Do you mind elaborating on this?

I already explained it a few pages back.

[Starlight321]

@Leo Gura I have a question. It seems to me that equalizing everthing to death which is created by the assumption that all people are equal leads to equating that you would include disabled and poor people which distorts your argument. Is this the case?

[PurpleTree]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

This is exactly why I used this thread to push you lefties, to challenge your comfortable assumptions.

 

I’m not a leftie btw. (aside from being left handed)

 

I just think the death penalty is outdated stupid and vile.

[puporing]

49 minutes ago, yetineti said:

I do not care about business. And for that reason, I will inherently understand it better than you.

This is not a good argument, you are just feeding the other side by also being ignorant about the subject.

22 minutes ago, yetineti said:

It’s about structural inequity.   There are countless ways to better allocate funds.

 

22 minutes ago, yetineti said:

People do leave when they can. But also some jobs are essential. And if everyone just quit because they were feeling unfairly treated… essential industries would break… At a certain point things must be rebuilt from the inside out. You cannot just tear down and move around whatever doesn’t work.

These are much better points.

As well you could talk about non-profits which still have to work like a competitive business, or for-profits that are not so profit driven for the shareholders/board of directors.

The people leading those companies clearly exist in our world and do just fine without getting paid massive amounts of money to do the job.

Also note I am not saying a non-profit is automatically less corrupt, it has to actually be less corrupt. There are plenty of ones that are also not true to their statments.

Edited 11 hours ago by puporing

[Something Funny]

2 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I already explained it a few pages back.

Got it. I do generally think that you are right, but I still think that we could find a better balance of strictness without going all the way to the death penalty.

I feel like what's causing the most backlash is not some crazy serial killer getting a life sentence instead of a death sentence. It's seeing a bunch of thugs go completely unpunished or severely underpunished for much smaller crimes. 

Like random thugs doing street takeovers with their cars, or vandalizing public property, or harassing people and then seeing how nobody does anything at all about them.

At least that's what causes me to have this feeling of emotional backlash the most.

 

[Leo Gura]

1 minute ago, Starlight321 said:

@Leo Gura I have a question. It seems to me that equalizing everthing to death which is created by the assumption that all people are equal leads to equating that you would include disabled and poor people which distorts your argument. Is this the case?

Leftism doesn't want to question itself, so instead it would rather accuse me of wanting to execute disabled people.

In the mind of a leftist, the notion of executing murderers does not compute. So the leftist mind needs some way to portray such an idea as belonging to a Nazi or something like that.

Leftist mind: "Oh, you support the death penalty? You must be a secret Nazi who also wants to execute disabled kids. That's the only possibilty here."

[Something Funny]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

Leftism doesn't want to question itself, so instead it would rather accuse me of wanting to execute disabled people.

2 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

In the mind of a leftist, the notion of executing murderers does not compute. So the leftist mind needs some way to portray such an idea as belonging to a Nazi or something like that.

I don't remember where or what exactly you've said, but it was something along the lines of you practicing not wishing death even on horrible people like Putin or Trump.

Is this somehow different to death penalty, in your opinion?

[The Crocodile]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Leftism doesn't want to question itself, so instead it would rather accuse me of wanting to execute disabled people.

In the mind of a leftist, the notion of executing murderers does not compute. So the leftist mind needs some way to portray such an idea as belonging to a Nazi or something like that.

Leftist mind: "Oh, you support the death penalty? You must be a secret Nazi who also wants to execute disabled kids. That's the only possibilty here."

Your worldview is a fractal. Their worldview is another fractal.

They see your view here as overly dark, stark, unforgiving, and pointless. They think the logical conclusion of killing one person is already no longer a threat is equivalent to killing someone who is also not a threat but a "hindrance".

Edited 11 hours ago by The Crocodile