this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2025
90 points (77.8% liked)

Showerthoughts

38212 readers
807 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Am I just deceived? I think I might love him?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] actionjbone@sh.itjust.works 45 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (7 children)

I'd give all the billionaires the same choice:

(a) Give away everything except, say, 25 million.

(b) Guillotine.

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Does that include the Kelley Blue Book of my boats or are we talking purely liquid (heh) assets?

[–] actionjbone@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Oh, everything.

Got a $20m yacht? Sell it. Oh, youcre forced to sell it for $50k because nobody will give you more? That's just the free market, clearly it's only worth $50k.

Paid $75m to build your house? Well someone is offering you $175k and you'd better take it.

And you own a company worth $100m? No you don't, it was already taken from you and turned into a worker-owned co-op.

After all the sales and seizures, you've got $23.1m in cash, and just 1m more in the bank? OK, dude, we cool.

[–] white_nrdy@programming.dev 7 points 1 week ago

At that point, would you need to sell those assets? If the issue is your net worth, and your assets aren't worth much, then your net worth is low.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 35 points 1 week ago (4 children)

If he continues to be a billionaire, yes.

Amassing that level of wealth is not an accident, it's by choice.

[–] EightBitBlood@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (19 children)

I agree with this sentiment, but given a choice, I believe Gabe would make the right one and spend his wealth to lose billionaire status.

His supposed exploitation was not by his own design, but rather by luck - the sheer benefit of riding a privately owned and benevelontly steered surfboard on top of the waves of a collapsing capitalist society.

Basically, there's a meme about all other companies shooting themselves in the foot so Gabe always benefits, and part of that is in the way those companies fucked and manipulated their control of capital and markets. Gabe benefits just by being one of the few that can afford to participate in that system others rigged.

So he simply rigs it the least, and wins by providing the platform with the least greedy problems. Far far less than he could given his position.

IMHO, despite all controversies, Steams cut of profits from providing equal access to game visibility despite creator, nationality, background, etc, has legitimately opened the door for nearly anyone to be successful on their platform. For all the tools and services they provide, they ask for literally the smallest cut compared to any other publishing platform.

Gabe could destroy that to his benefit on a whim, and instead he over designs it to make it possible for nearly anyone to try game dev if they do the work needed to develop for them.

To hold so much capital simply for providing some form of equality to access the same in a system that overwhelming benefits others with more resources is in no way greedy imo. It's being the person with the only fire extinguisher who knows how to use it in a burning building: popular.

load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] 4grams@awful.systems 30 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

There is no such thing as a good billionaire. There are billionaires who might be temporarily aligned with you but make no mistake, none of them will love you back..

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CaptainBasculin@lemmy.bascul.in 24 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Valve is in a very unique spot where employees are all paid well because of the low amount of employees they have and the massive income they generate; in their employee reviews you typically don't really see low salary as a reason to leave.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Billionaires aren't your friends. Corporations aren't your friends.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] crypt0cler1c@infosec.pub 21 points 1 week ago

He has 6 yachts from kiddie gambling...

[–] Aequitas@feddit.org 17 points 1 week ago

Idealizing billionaires is cringe. Eat them all. Just because he's not a complete asshole like all the other parasites doesn't make him a good person. He's still a parasite.

[–] NewDark@lemmings.world 16 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Look, he can be a rich guy and a leader. 1 billion is a decent line in the sand of "sorry, you own too much". He's certainly not as nakedly evil as most the rest of his ilk.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] amzd@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Why? He takes a 30% cut from every game sale just because his platform has a dominant grasp on gamers.

I don’t understand how people can hate taxes (which go on to pay for schools and roads) but not the way larger cut that digital storefronts charge.

[–] anyhow2503@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago

There's an argument to be made that it's too high of a cut, especially these days. A lot of this money has funded great improvements to the gaming ecosystem and many open source projects. The major competing storefronts/launchers do not come even slightly close to the feature set that Steam provides, but they have tried attracting users through exclusivity deals. It's very telling that some successful competitors (like itch or gog) actually offer some unique benefits and aren't attached to some incredibly controversial corporations...

Valve isn't free from criticism and their role as a monopolist should definitely be scrutinized, especially as companies often radically change for the worse in behaviour and culture, but a lot of this critical attention was instigated by Epic CEO Tim Sweeney who can frankly gargle my nuts.

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't want to love him. I just feel like I'd never find anyone better, if I left, you know?

[–] amzd@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Is this one of those “the ogre has fallen I love with the princess” farquaad meme situations

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] 30p87@feddit.org 8 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I hate misused taxes.

Gabe at least gives us 95% greatness back (5% being gambling)

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] rikudou@lemmings.world 6 points 1 week ago

Pff, I wish my overall taxation was only 30%.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dontsayaword@piefed.social 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Being a billionaire is immoral in all cases

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

In my opinion if anyone has billions of dollars and hasn't given a majority of it away to charity or those in need, that person is on some level at least somewhat an evil person.

Sure, much of it would be tied up in stocks and stuff that legally can't be sold for specific purposes or timeframes, but if you have net worth in the billions and any stocks that could be sold for cash and then donated it should be. Or if you have an annual income that's much more than you need to live an extremely comfortable life and then you just spend and invest the excess instead of donate.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] melfie@lemy.lol 13 points 1 week ago (8 children)

I have no problem with people who contribute a lot of value to society being proportionally rewarded. However, having a net worth in the billions is just plain ludicrous, especially since the billionaires aren’t the ones creating all the value, they’re just controlling it. For example, did Gabe invent everything that makes Valve as successful as it is, or was most of it designed and developed by engineers who are paid a fraction of what he is paid? Even if most of Valve’s IP started with Gabe and other engineers were doing the grunt work to “make it so”, that still shouldn’t mean that society allows this one man to control billions worth of our societal resources.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago

A billionaire who gives away 99% of their wealth to the poorest, first and exclusively, isn't a billionaire, and still has enough money (maybe more!) for the rest of time.

[–] paultimate14@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago (3 children)

"Billionaire" is a convenient modern buzzword. It used to be "millionaire". The classic joke from Austin Powers where Dr. Evil demands money is a good example. It's just inflation.

Plus, a lot of "billionaires" are only considers such because they own shares in their corporations. It's a "theoretically if they could find a way to sell all of those shares at the current price without tanking the market value of those shares in the process, they could get $X billion from that".

If there were a theoretical global revolution, on of the the first steps of eating the rich is to seize and nationalize those businesses. Later, land reform will seize the extra mansions they own. They will still be left with adequate personal property to live quite comfortably. Finally, the justice system will need to evaluate what labor laws (or other laws) they may have been violating for years and using their wealth to get away with.

Start with the biggest fish and watch as the rest start to downsize voluntarily and cut deals to avoid jail.

I don't expect to see any of this in my lifetime. Not in any major country, and certainly not globally.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Cooper8@feddit.online 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Offer him the option to transition Valve to a workers cooperative. Boom, he would no longer be a billionaire.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 9 points 1 week ago

We don't have to eat them all, but we do have to take their money.

[–] PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Only if he gives up his power and privilege permanently

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 week ago

If it were to be a revolution he would be given the chance. Just be a director of valve for a normal director salary. If he take it then he would be just another worker.

[–] xpey@piefed.social 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I personally don't like the idea of murder, I'd if we-the-people get into power, just pass laws that taxes them, then enforce the law as such. If they resist, jailtime for tax evasion.

For those that are exceedingly cruel with their time as a billionaire, they get tried, judged by a jury of average people, 2/3 is a conviction (as opposed to the unanimity required now), life imprisonment.

Billionaires and their heirs are deprived of political rights.

Easy peaceful transition. Zero bloodshed

I don't like bloodshed, because once that starts, once we "okay" mob killings, people are gonna attack anyone they don't like, including small bussiness owners they had a grudge against in the past.

I have empathy, I don't wanna see the streets filled with blood.

[–] OldChicoAle@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Yeah I don't think we can force billionaires to do anything without some violence. Have you seen the world and how long the rich have been in power?

[–] the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago

We can save him for desert.

[–] practisevoodoo@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago

He can buy his freedom by using his wealth to finally release hl3

[–] Mr_Fish@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

He's low on the list for sure

[–] termaxima@slrpnk.net 7 points 6 days ago

We shouldn't eat them. I don't want prion disease.

[–] OriginalUsername7@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Valve makes tonnes of money from loot boxes or whatever they’re called. Basically a form of gambling.

It also just so happens that a great way of making a shit load of money is making it super easy for people to buy from you. Valves big competitive advantage is just… not fucking that up. A surprising number of companies fuck that up.

And as someone else said, Gabe doesn’t have to be a billionaire. He could use his phenomenal wealth to build hospitals and help the poor, rather than building his own little private navy.

Valve is doing a lot that will make people like them, but they’re still a huge corporation, and Gabe is still a billionaire.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I'm not eating Elon Musk. That's like dumpster diving behind a cracker barrel.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Suburbanl3g3nd@lemmings.world 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If one bad apple truly should the bunch, yes. Yes you have to eat him too

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] spykee@lemmings.world 6 points 1 week ago
[–] OldChicoAle@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

ABAB. All billionaires are bad.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (10 children)

Do we get to keep his boats?

He has at least 6. Maybe we can get HL3 if we say we want it to take place entirely on a giant yacht... 🤔

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] halvar@lemy.lol 6 points 1 week ago (11 children)

As far as I know Valve isn't one of those companies that employes a hundred thousand minimum-wage slaves, but one that's gotten big, by actually innovating, which is like the only potentially good aspect of capitalism and seems to not be something most corporations do anymore. Of course were this question to ever become relevant he would have to give up most of his wealth, but it's not like he is one of those billionaires that eat babies for breakfast.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] Wilco@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 week ago

Sorry, but they must all be eaten. There should be no billionaires.

load more comments
view more: next ›