Billie Eilish drags billionaires in speech with Mark Zuckerberg in the room
https://www.out.com/media/billie-eilish-billionaires-speech-mark-zuckerberg-net-worthOpen linkView original on lemmy.world425
Comments91https://www.out.com/media/billie-eilish-billionaires-speech-mark-zuckerberg-net-worthOpen linkView original on lemmy.world
This is just...so weak. I really would have appreciated a "fuck you" and a vague threat of violence, but alas.
Man, dragging just isn't what it used to I guess
Jesus, by the headline I expected her to say something along the line of "your money is earned through exploitation of society's most vulnerable people, you wastes of air". Not, "why don't you give some of it away kthxbye <3"
"Wow she's so articulate."
Blasted! Skewered, even.
s l a m m e d
The ghost of Gaddafi is like, “yo WTF, this is what getting dragged is now??”
Playing both sides so she always comes out on top.
Love you all, no hate tho ❤️
Damn what a baddie
She did reference them as "shorties" though. Which, however often benign it is now, has a condescending tone. I liked that part.
They're never going to financially recover from this.
Oh wait actually nevermind, it turns out they actually made more money while I was writing that sentence than I've made in my entire life. I guess they'll be okay.
I mean, wouldn't they need to financially suffer first to have a recovery? So I agree, they won't financially recover from this non-event. There's nothing to recover from.
Yeah that was originally the joke, but then halfway through writing it I just got depressed.
But were they eviscerated?
And did they all go to the same cocktail party afterwards?
DESTROYED, even.
The cocktail wieners tasted funny. I think it was the Brazilian rosewood toothpicks soaked in cognac, and covered in gold leaf. Billie had 16!
Billie Eilish SLAMS Mark Zuckerberg then gets SMASHED at the afterparty
I mean, I'd definitely smash.
You people bitch when they use the term "slam" but here they are trying something new and you shit on them anyway.
Turns out that its not the specific few words, but the fact that Zuck wasn't physically dragged/slammed/destroyed/evicerated or even just separated from his hundreds of billions. She actually just said some words.
Reasonable complaint, but I'd sooner commend her actions over the condemn the author's title.
It's just the hyperbole. It wouldn't matter which specific word they used if it more closely matched the level of intensity of what actually happened.
In this instance, even a cliché, overused term like 'jabs' would be fine.
We need more hate towards billionaires
the rich just need some special hugs! specifically on their necks!
We should donate them all kavorkian scarfs for winter.
That's a great halloween costume idea.
So in 10 years they've given away 3% of his net worth? Fucking slackers.
Well they need to enjoy every penny until they die. THEN they will give it away. To their own charity that has political influence for their kids.
So they will give 99% away. Which leaves them a billionaire.
Zuckerberg isn't going to have children
He…already does. What are you talking about?
Are you talking about the clones of himself he keeps in the cloning vats in the basement of the META building or the human children he adopted to seem more human?
oh, fuck if i knew, i couldn't give a shit about that fucking rat.
Then why make such loud, confident statements?
because it's the internet, 70% of the shit on it is porn, 35% is shitposting, ragebait, AI trite, and scams, and the other 5% is actual useful content. oh no, are you gonna mark this on my permanent record? what ever will I do after getting called out for making an incorrect statement about one of the most evil lunatics in the world?
In my experience on the internet, people who just have to loudly tell you how much they don’t care are the ones that care the most.
he isnt giving away his cash cow, silly people.
We need to protect people like Zuckerburg from being singled out and hated by society. This is why we need to tax his wealth until he's no longer a billionaire. We need to tax him for his own good.
When I was growing up, I didn't even have a concept of a billionaire. I remember considering that to be a millionaire you had to be able to spend a million dollars and still have a million left over. In effect, a person wasn't a millionaire until they had reached the second million. Who Wants to Be a Millionaire threw me for a loop because the top prize was only a million dollars.
When I was a young teenager I was quite pleased at saving $300 to buy a new bike because after I bought it, I still had just over a hundred dollars left. It was euphoric to have been a hundredaire for a few days.
Not sure why that popped into my head reading your comment, but there you go.
"drags"
This is why AI is so successful in replacing bloggers but will never even come close to replacing real journalists.
Almost as bad as 'slams'.
"real journalists"
I think those have been extinct for well over a decade now.
All I've seen are smug douchebags jerking themselves off for "saving democracy" by posting mugshots and peddling billionaire propaganda.
It's not like the media has been utterly complicit in boosting trump to where he is now.
That's a US amurican centered view. Real journalism hasn't died, even in the US, i. e. Jason Schrier, reports important events in the industry like the Rockstar anti union events. Reuters, DW, ICJ, et al continue to do good work. It's not their fault our governments ignore the reporting and let everyone walk scot free after panama papers, et al.
For each real journalist you name I can name two dozen shitheads. The state of journalism is fucked
Real journalists? You mean the same people who write "according to a report from xyz organisation". Which report you lazy fucks? I'm looking for the source, not your layman's interpretation.
Journalists (on average) are atrocious at citing their sources, or are being asked to be atrocious, and it has driven me crazy when searching online many times.
More like 'gently chides'. Weak.
"Drags" "slams" She didn't do anything that would affect anything at all. I don't care.
I am a wrestler and we don't use the word slam anywhere near as much as these 'journalists' do.
Maybe this will motivate Taylor Swift to give more than her equivalent of a nickel to a dying kid.
Real issue is not just owning billions, there is also what you have to do to hold on to that kind of money: suck up to dictators so they let you monopolize tech and crush small competitors.
not news. put this in the tabloid and entertainment communities
i dont get why billie ellish is such a big topic to talk about but also im old af so thats prolly why.
She is a pop star, of course, and therefore commands a sizeable fanbase and attention of the press, and anything she says will have weight.
that is a very low bar for "dragging"
Billie Eilish SLAMS billionaires!
“Who?” - 99.8% of billionaires
TBH Eilish always seemed really fake before, kind of vulgar and low talent with the pop equivalent of mumble rapping, but this kind of statement is as real as it gets bringing attention to the fact that "things are really, really bad" because you know for sure a lot of assholes in that crowd were trying real hard to ignore it.
“Especially in our country”? Fuck outta here.
Is Billie Eilish giving away her money as a millionaire?
Remember the difference between a million and a billion is about a billion. Millionaires are not the problem.
To be the equivalent of someone making $10k giving $100 to charity, a millionaire would have to give $10k.
A billionaire would have to give 10 million dollars.
While your broad point isn't wrong, it's good to separate wealth and income.
For anyone struggling with the logic on this one, alllow me to beeak it down.
1 billion minus 1 million equals 999 million, or, for all intents and purposes..
On a scale from 0 to 1 billion, 1 million is one tenth of one percent of the distance up from 0. From the perspective of a billionaire, a low end millionaire is indistinguishable from a homeless person.
While it's cathartic to hate on everyone with money when you're struggling to pay rent and feed your family, billionaires are the problem (and taste like chicken).
A thousand million
They're both part of the problem, along with their useful dipshits.
Depends on how you are defining "millionaire". If you are going by "sum of all assets is greater than $1,000,000), then 99% of the people who you say are part of the problem, are simply people who own a detached house in the right location (context for this is that the average price for a detached house in the city of Toronto is just under $1,000,000 USD).
No, millionaires are part of the problem too. Especially celebrities.
If they are doctors, then they get a pass. That's all.
Let's stop defending the people ripping us off. They only have more because we're proud to have less.
I'm going to block you now because this is not a back and forth.
Edit: The downvotes speak for themselves. Most of you are useful idiots proud to be taken for a ride, and hate anyone who calls it out.
Keep being stupid. It makes them more money.
Wait, so some plumber who bought a house back in the 80s is "ripping us off"?
Unless you're talking about people with tens or hundreds of millions, millionaires are largely inconsequential. Additionally, depending on where they live, a millionaire might have less usable money than someone with hundreds of thousands.
Charging them the most they're willing to pay while giving them the least they're willing to accept. She could do her performances on an average salary, but why would she do that if useful idiots are proud to pay her more? She wouldn't be able to get ahead of people like you if she did that, and of course you're here defending her.
You wouldn't understand this though because then you'd have to admit how you get ripped off on the regular.
Keep consuming.
You appear to be quite irritated at people asking you questions about your opinions.
From the Rolling Stones article about this same speech, it appears Eilish donated an eight figure sum of money recently. This is remarkable given multiple outlets seem to estimate her net worth also being an eight figure sum.
We lowly 'consumers' on the other hand tend only to have a five or six figure net worth, ignoring the home some of us are fortunate enough to own. None of us are donating 10-20% of our net worth periodically (except the Mormons). It seems a bit out of touch to rail against someone that appears this philanthropic when there are thousands of billionaires the same energy could be pitted against instead.
The goal posts have moved. Millionaires used to be considered part of the villainized rich group.
These days it's not been out of reach for people to become millionaires themselves. Espcially in online spaces with a lot of tech sector workers. Many of them are millionaires. So the goal post had to move.
More broadly speaking we live in a time of great inequality. The people who've been doing well are doing very well. Combine that with generations of people having higher education and higher paying careers. There's a lot more millionaires these days too as well as billionaires. A lot of them post online and get super offended you're calling them out.
As for those who are defending all that. I got no clue. Why defend them. Yikes.
she donates and volunteers with non-profits pretty regularly
If a person has hundreds of millions of dollars of worth in their pocket, they are not donating enough
I saw a few outlets estimate Eilish is worth somewhere in the tens of millions not quite hundreds. From this Rolling Stones article, also about the speech, she recently donated 11.5 million. Apparently this type of thing isn't out of the norm for her.
Equivalently, Zuckerberg would need to donate around 30-100 billion to match Eilish proportionally. To bring it back to earth, you or I would need to donate thousands - if not tens of thousands - to be proportionally similar. I won't speak for you, but I'm not in the habit of donating double digit percentages of my salary.
If she has donated 11.5 million, I would assume she has more than tens of millions.
If that information is correct, great. Either way, She certainly is no Taylor Swift (in regard to the money) on any day of the week.
That sounds like you're just making deliberately shitty assumptions in order to be a jackass
I assume you mean someone randomly pulling 11.5 million out of their ass? And that you’re not just trying to be a jackass because you want to support her?
Yes. She donated $11.5 million to charity and has a net worth of around $50 million. That's around 20%. If Zuckerburg did even 10%, it would be around 2,000 times more.
That's about 260x the median net worth in the US.
Yes, and? Have you donated 20% of your net worth to charity?
20% of nothin' is nothin'.
Ah yes she hit him with the power of talking. There is a chance he won't recover from this for the next 5 seconds.
Meh, try doing it everyday and make a real difference
Good fuck 'em.