8 really rich guys who, collectively, work 2-3 days a week? 🤔
this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2026
1132 points (99.1% liked)
Political Memes
11337 readers
1430 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
"work"
collectively. so i'd give them that.
Work being asking a bunch of people for ideas, and pointing a finger and saying "Do that."
I can handle that gig. Make me a Billionaire.
load more comments
(1 replies)
No no no, when you ask them, they work 200 hours a week. Each of them. At the very least!
Hours.
load more comments
(1 replies)
cant have well rested workers with more time to think, question, and organise.
Want to fix all this?
Make one simple change to capitalism: put in. A constitutional hard cap on personal wealth. Anything income or gift or whatever over 1 million goes 100% to taxes
Nobody has some inherent right to be rich or powerful. Nobody got extremely rich by themselves or through hard work, it's just sheer fucking luck and standing on the backs of others
Nobody should have to be poor either
So without changing and overhauling the entire world, just set a hard cap on personal wealth.
May e also company sizes. Any networth over 1 billion? 100% to tax. Companies shouldn't be able to have over, say 1000 employees either.
I don't want a trillion dollar company with 200.000 employees. Give me 10.000 companies worth 100 million dollar companies that each employ a hundred or so workers.
Two simple rules that would change the world. Nobody would be sicher more powerful than anyone else.
All it requires is that everyone in the world says ENOUGH. Enough with the abuses from the rich and powerful
Huey Long campaigned on a wealth cap back in the 30's on his 'Share our wealth' platform. The excess wealth taxed at 100% was to be used for essentially a universal basic income (Each person to receive the equivalent of $38k yearly).
He was assassinated. The rich elite of Louisiana and the Oil companies he massively increased state taxes on to fund his public programs rejoiced.
Ken Burn's first documentary was on Huey Long, highly worth a watch.
Putting a hard cap on the ratio between the highest and the lowest paid workers in any organisation would help as well.
THIS might be a better solution, although it still doesn't fix the "CEO is only earning $1 a year" situations like with Bezos or Zuckerberg.
Alright, let's run a quick model.
Let's say the upper cap is $1000k.
You are a CEO and you get a salary of, say, $10k, plus 1000 shares, each worth $1. So, in total, that year your worth is $120k + $1000 = $121k.
Now, you're incredibly successful as a CEO, you make your shareholders drool for your company's shares. Which makes their price skyrocket. Each share is now worth $1000! Such success!
But wait! No! Catastrophe!
Your worth has just gone up to $120k + $1000k! The share's value on their own hits the upper limit of wealth!
They're not your money, mind you, you can't do anything with them unless you cash them in, sell them.
So, you have two choices - you stop getting any salary and have $0 for spending (hopefully the office cafeteria is well stocked!), or you sell some shares, give the money to charity, and pray the stock price doesn't go up. And if it does, you have to sell again, lose the money, and... oh, but now you no longer hold a controlling interest in your own company - some three dudes who work together bought up the shares, spread them around evenly (so neither of them goes above the $1000k), and they effectively control your own company, telling you what to do with it.
Companies shouldn’t be able to have over, say 1000 employees either.
So, instead of having some large companies, you end up with chains of "totally not the same" companies that just work together. "Oh, we've outsourced our HR to company X, which is Totally Not The Same as our company, they just don't work with anybody else and we have full data transparency with them."
I am pretty sure than between the current model that is slowly but inexorably going towards: "2 kinds of people in the world: trillionaires and people depending on trillionaire's charity to survive", and the model decribed above, we can find a middle ground.
Not so long ago, the ratio between CEOs pay and median worker pay was 20. Today it's 280. There were successful and motivated CEO at the time.
The US had a period during which the highest tax bracket was 90%. There were CEO, there were rich folks and there were entrepreneurs.
Enough with all the "impossible". The current situation is the anomaly. The current situation is the not sustainable approach. It's not just the US, neo-liberalism has spread over the decades with the very very very exact same results absolutely everywhere it was tried:
-impoverished population overall -reduction of services to the population -increased public deficit -ultra-rich getting immensely richer
Either we keep saying "it's complicated" and keep course. Its end is already known: a collapse of the economy on itself: there is not enough people left making a decent enough living to buy what is produced, and everything belong to the ultra-rich.
Or we change course. It's almost a matter of survival for the poor.
I agree! I'm only saying that often the "simple solutions" aren't really solutions when you stop for a moment to really think about the consequences.
Feudalism was tenable for centuries--until it wasn't. Just because capitalism pulled off a balancing act of sorts doesn't mean we can turn back time.
There are several countries that have a wealth tax and they still have rich CEOs, so there is a way to address the problems that you're describing.
Of course! It's just never as easy as people think.
Oh yeah, 100% agree.
You're right that their plan won't literally work as they've designed it, but they have the right idea and ideas can be refined.
Yes, they'll find loopholes. Close those, too.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Agreed. Fixing our issues has nothing to do with invading Greenland and Venezuela, but is entirely to do with the redistribution of wealth.
Make one simple change to capitalism: put in. A constitutional hard cap on personal wealth. Anything income or gift or whatever over 1 million goes 100% to taxes
You don't understand where the vast majority of the wealthiest's wealth comes from. There's no "income" or "gift" at that level, it's just the fact that they own things that are becoming more valuable over time. The vast majority of the increase in these people's wealth over time is newly-created; it's value that literally didn't exist before, not an amount of cash money taken away from anyone else.
Speaking of value: net worth is just a valuation, a price tag. It's the market saying "I would pay you $X for a share of this if you sold it". If I buy a rookie baseball card for $5 and the player becomes famous for whatever reason and my card is now worth $100 because the demand significantly increased, my net worth increased by $95, but no one was deprived of $95 to make that so.
A hard cap on wealth is effectively legislating that if something you already own becomes too valuable, you're not allowed to continue owning it anymore. And any sensible person should understand why that makes zero sense.
load more comments
(15 replies)
I've got a job where I work 4 one week and 3 the other. It's 12 hour shifts though.
Unfortunately I still need a part time job to cover bills.... But if I didn't it would be amazing
I have a 35-hour week with flexible hours so I could put it in 3 days if I wished. That seems awful to me though, I can't really focus on my work anymore after 6 hours. All a matter of perspective I guess.
I can't really focus on my work anymore after 6 hours.
Who cares, that's the company's problem. Do what works for YOU. The company made this policy, you should exploit the shit out of it. That's what any corporation would do.
I'd get my hours in during the first three days of the week, then spend my free time making MY life better.
Well, you do you, but I prefer to actually get work done when I'm at work. If I don't like my work anymore (well, it's not my hobby, but still not that bad), I'll go work somewhere else.
Valid.
Wondering how much would 8 guillotine cost
They are reusable.
But you never know where the really rich guys might go. We may have to camp out beside a number of bunkers across the world. Like a spare key, it's better to have an extra one and not use it than to not have one when you need it.
Yeah. I guess I'm just partial to the imagery of waiting until they're all together and having an angry mob... Give them all a haircut... At the same time.
You don't really need a device. If the guillotine breaks down, you can do just as effective a job with a random rock.
If they're hiding in bunkers, you can just seal it up from the outside.
You only need one. Make them wait in line and watch their colleagues go before them.
And give it a dull blade, so it takes 3 or 4 chops to finish the job.
Also more economically productive. But the ultra-wealthy are aristocrats cosplaying as managers, and reducing the workweek of the filthy poors reduces how entertaining their cosplay is to them.
It also gives people more time to organize, work a side gig to pull themselves out of poverty, or go to school for the same reason. Can’t have any of that
Gotta have your wage slaves and debt slaves.
load more comments
(2 replies)
They are more like 8 little kings
Believe it or not a 4 day work week would boost the economy. What do you think people do on their day off? SPEND MONEY. Chores, lunch, home/car repairs, you name it.
Same thing with that proposed billionaire tax in CA.
Bunch of assholes.
policy favors money always always will
As the world evolves (supposedly), productivity rockets skywards.
And we have gone from a...
- 3 hour work day... to a...
- 6 hour work day... to a....
- 12 hour work day... to a...
- 7 hour work day... (or 8 or 9 or more if you're in the US or China or a factory- or fascist country)
And of course this is pitiful. We should be working a couple days a week at most.
The very idea that we have to work when we have so much automation is ludicrous. Why do we have to make our owners richer? Why can't we turn them into fertiliser instead? And why can't we make them really, and I mean really aware of the possibility.
That cartoon "there's so many of them, why don't they just eat the lesser class?" (ok, I don't remember how it was formulated), is something the billionaires (and politicians) ought to have pinned in each of their rooms.
Still, right now we should be at two days or 2 hour work days.
But thanks to AI, work days ought to be longer. You'll have to catch up for all the people that got laid off/
Why won't anyone think of the capital?
8 malignant narcissist pedofiles who we’ve allowed to destroy the world.
You'll never get it when the ones in charge want 8/28 workhours.
I suppose that’s also the reason their account is suspended.
view more: next ›