219
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] RestrictedAccount@lemmy.world 137 points 7 months ago

To be fair, no rich persons wealth significantly trickles down

[-] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 40 points 7 months ago

Yeah it feels kinda weird to single him out in a way that insinuates it’s because he’s black…

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 45 points 7 months ago

I think it's more about the fact that he's pretending that he's lifting up the black people of Atlanta when in reality it's the opposite.

Just like with every other billionaire pretending to be a philanthropic force in the world.

[-] UsernameHere@lemmings.world 7 points 7 months ago

This is the first I’ve heard of him “pretending” that he’s lifting up black people of Atlanta. I’ve read the article and didn’t see anything that supports that claim. Where is it coming from?

The article basically says: ‘Tyler Perry bought property in a low income area of Atlanta and it hasn’t single-handedly fixed income inequality. See! Liberals support trickle down economics too!’

This seems like it’s written in bad faith.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

Just because you haven't heard about it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Two of those links are to his own website that he has to promote himself.

Also, neoliberal or not, Tyler Perry is deeply conservative in many ways, including his focus on self-glorifying private charity over supporting the many public programs and NGOs that are much more effective at alleviating poverty like he's claiming to attempt.

[-] UsernameHere@lemmings.world 4 points 7 months ago

Those are all examples of him donating to charity and helping people which is the opposite of pretending.

And why are you referring to him as a neoliberal? The article mentioned liberals in the American politics context. Which has nothing to do with neoliberalism.

Just because he chose to donate to charity doesn’t mean he ‘chose it over supporting public programs’.

I’ve donated to charity before. Does that mean I am I neoliberal that is deeply conservative etc, etc? Nope. I just wanted to help and if that wasn’t the most effective way to help then I just didn’t know of a better way.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] Zippy@lemmy.world -1 points 7 months ago

Just because he is black doesn't mean he gets a free ride. If he is doing a shitty think like any other race, then he should get called out.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

The headline does a poor job of establishing context. The article has it, but the headline should've been along the lines of "Despite the recent feel good biopic about him, his wealth isn't helping everyday Atlanta residents".

Without that context it feels very unusual, and even with that context, I can't say that I agree this is newsworthy. He was born poor, and he made his money by directing and starring in movies. Becoming a billionaire from that is infinitely more moral than making a giant corporation off the backs of minimum wage employees.

I'm sure he's done things worth criticizing and could afford to pay workers at his studio more. But in the grand scheme of things, are they really worth this much time and effort when there's vastly more egregious shitheads out there? Why waste your time with someone who actually is trying to give back when you have Musk as the perfect poster child of why billionaires should be taxed at 100%?

[-] Zippy@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Becoming a billionaire creating little value for the average person is better than a CEO that can provide employment for thousands of people. Seriously?

Actually I think the arts are as important as any other job but get serious if you think that means they are a better person than a CEO.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

What if those thousands of jobs don't pay a living wage? While Perry might not provide as much convenience as Amazon, he certainly hasn't fucked over as many workers either. I'd wager most rich musicians are far more moral than business tycoons. Taylor Swift famously paid $100k to truckers for tours and covered all the healthcare expenses too I believe for all the tour workers.

[-] Zippy@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

When it comes to what they provide, Perry doesn't put a single morsel of food on the majority of the people he interacts with. I bet the CEO of exon, who makes under 10 million a year, pays some wages far more than the 100k Taylor Swift pays along with all kinds of medical coverage. And Taylor Swift is likely making some 100 million a year for likely less work.

Not only is Taylor Swift making 10 times the wages, she pays less overall wages and supports likely only a few hundred people.

The CEO of exon makes one tenth her wage, employees 1000s of people, likely many over that 100k a year and benefits, and he likely works more hours.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Let me tell you some things about Exxon. They easily employ over 1000, probably closer to 10,000. It's like a nation state of its own in some ways. The engineers certainly all make over 100k and nice medical benefits and a 401k match -- but they're exploited labor all the same. They'll suspend the 401k match and fire a third of the work force, and ask you to take on double the work to compensate while being paid less. They'll say they're based on science and facts, and then demand people come into the office vs WFH for no reason other than butts in chairs, and no actual benefits. They'll send internal emails to remind you that "blue lives matter" when there are ongoing racial injustice protests, and bring over a senator running for reelection to give them free advertising during a town hall. They'll say they care about sustainability and global warming, and then fight tooth and nail against any actual, significant changes to that end.

The engineers on the other hand, they're truly amazing people. They care about sustainability changes. They care about their coworkers. They're exceptionally brilliant. And they're just treated like cogs in the machine. Expendable, and they're always looking for lower cost cogs. The workplace will drive you to the point that you realize you have mental health issues and need to go to therapy. And if those mental health issues get in the way of your with, you're "put on a performance plan" for having low performance , even during a pandemic.

As you've probably guessed, I previously worked for good ol daddy Darren. A lot of my colleagues who were also young working professionals have since left the company too. And some of my friends who are still there don't have much love for the company either.

I don't know where I was going with this, you got me on a bit of a tangent I suppose. Just know that they don't pay enough for the bullshit they put you through, and they don't value their employees nearly as much as they should.

[-] UsernameHere@lemmings.world 2 points 7 months ago

What if he is doing good things like donating to charities and investing in low income communities and Republicans try to spin it as a bad thing to claim Democrats are as bad as the Republican Party?

What should we do then?

Because that is what is happening.

[-] ReluctantMuskrat@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

Is it just the opposite? Is he actively hindering the black people of Atlanta? Is he doing something differently than all the other wealthy people in GA? If not then I don't see why he alone is called out here.

load more comments (16 replies)
[-] Bender_on_Fire@lemmy.world 21 points 7 months ago

I think the text tries to make the point that it doesn't work not because but despite him being black. The argument Perry and others make in this case is not one in the form of material benefits but rather moral ones. A member of a marginalized group makes it big, which is supposed to inspire others from this group. The point is that this form of trickle down economics works just as badly as the "regular" one, which is hardly at all.

[-] unoriginalsin@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

It doesn't work because, as pointed out by another commenter, wealth does not "trickle down". It only accumulates. This has been demonstrated to be a basic function of wealth and the minute you begin to think about it, it becomes obvious that having more resources makes it easier to gather more resources.

[-] Nacktmull@lemm.ee 18 points 7 months ago

Money trickles only one way, up

[-] Algaroth@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

The modern economics of today would be like if moisture just kept gathering into clouds but it never rained.

[-] fluxion@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

It trickles down to politicians and judges, but that's about it.

[-] misophist@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

That's just a temporary downward infusion to lubricate the mechanisms sending money back up.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 76 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

This article is awful for 3 reasons. Unfortunately each reason is one of the main hot takes the article tries and there is nothing redeeming otherwise - so maybe four reasons if you wanna get meta

1: Tyler Perry being decently-successful in media does not mean he owes people anything. More to the point, it is impossible to quantify what one person's success means to another. Even if they announce it at a speech, you've got no way to show a casual pattern.

2: It lumps in every tax break but completely ignores the localized benefits of those tax breaks. Georgia offers tax breaks to films because it makes them money.

The industry in Georgia was boosted substantially by tax incentives introduced in 2002 and strengthened in 2008. Just in the fiscal year 2017 film and TV production had an economic impact in Georgia of $9.5 billion, while industry sources claim that the tax subsidy costs the state $141 million (2010). (Wikipedia)

3: Perry, per the article's own admission, is giving substantially to the community in terms of pure charity

Perry earned plenty of glowing national headlines earlier this year for his philanthropy in donating $750,000 to help low-income seniors in Atlanta as property taxes increased.

Doesn't really make sense to paint him as the bad guy here by any of the angles the article tries to take.

I don't even care for Perry much, but this article is just misleading crap.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

If Jacobin stopped publishing misleading crap they wouldn't have any articles to print in the first place.

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 46 points 7 months ago

I stopped reading when the bullshit got this strong:

The irony is that these liberals, in addition to a weak commitment to hiking taxes on the rich, have their own version of the theory.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

I feel like these people ask themselves at every slight annoyance "How could I blame his on liberals?". They're the types who'd criticize people making $75k a year for their wealth.

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Right? It's pretty braindead to generalize "liberals" like this. Like yeah if I had ever heard of this before this article my reaction would not have been "oh that's great! Go black capitalism!!!"

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 18 points 7 months ago

I'm looking forward to the future film he'll be making about himself and this incident: Tyler Perry's Tyler Perry, a Tyler Perry Film.

[-] Algaroth@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

So much potential. Tyler Perry's Tyler Perry 2: Electric Tyler Perry: 2 Tyler 2 Perry.

[-] FontMasterFlex@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago

why would you expect anything different? "trickle down" economics was always a scam.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2023
219 points (83.3% liked)

politics

18129 readers
3591 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS