Badtrainwreck t1_jdqp7pq wrote

The technology is very far off, if it’s even possible since the human brain is very complex, but I wouldn’t be scared of it being used to just regularly read the thoughts of the average person as they go on their day to day.

I’d be terrified to work at a company, where your thoughts are used to gather input for the companies system and then it directs the actions of employees like a hive. All parts working in tandem to create maximum profitability. Your skills are no longer important, only your ability to be connected to the machine, because it takes care of the thinking for you, you’re just a data collection center.

Then the system grows, now you’re not just a customer, but in order to get the best prices you agree to allow your thoughts to be read. You need a new television, the warehouse puts it into the truck, the delivery driver is on his way, the TV manufacturer starts building another to replace it, the raw resources are mined as necessary.

Inventory is no longer about just-in-time delivery. We are beyond that, the system happens in tandem. The economy is one, we can eliminate redundancy, only one CEO is needed to operate the economy. He is God, we worship him for the efficiency for which he gave us, we are so thankful for what he and his lineage have done for us freeing us from the bondage that was our precious lives. Thankfully those who did not see his glorious generosity are no longer with us, those who refused to participate and those who questioned our God were not able to get the medicine and goods they needed as efficiently as us, all who sin are deserving of their fall.

All worship Jeff Bezos the 46th of his name, God most high, Master of Efficiency


Badtrainwreck t1_jacceq3 wrote

Not all writing is about the actual writing part, but mostly about comprehension, essay format, and proper citations. It’s like math, some might question why use a calculator for math, but it’s not about working math out by hand it’s about learning how to solve the problems.


Badtrainwreck t1_j8v42eg wrote

I’m an idiot, I can’t believe I wasn’t able to do a simple google search, egg on my face. Had I googled it I’d have seen that they disinvested in 2014, and I’d have also seen they did the charity work to increase the number of farmers in 2010! 4 years before selling and as we all know that time travel isn’t possible, but idk I’m not a lawyer


Badtrainwreck t1_j8v21cb wrote

Cheating on taxes? Again remember you and me have spoken about several ways in which nonprofits are used to increase someone’s financial position, not all ways involve taxes. One way was using a nonprofit to create rental income on property the nonprofit utilizes. That’s not avoiding taxes that’s benefiting financially in a legal method by utilizing a nonprofit in a way to enrich oneself.

Because Coca-Cola wants to do business with bill gates, he is one of the primary shareholders of Coca-Cola, plus Coca-Cola wants to be able to pay farmers less money for their products but there aren’t enough farmers producing what they want, so they are increasing the number of farmers to increase competitiveness to drive cocacolas costs further into the ground


Badtrainwreck t1_j8uz3da wrote

I just want to add you’ve seen the link of the Bill Gates Foundation offering grants to help farmers produce ingredients Coca-Cola needs, but it’s also important to know that Bill Gates stock ownership is public and he owns 1.599 billion in Coca-Cola stocks, so if you’re a lawyer and all of this sounds illegal, then we should have someone investigate. The government clearly isn’t


Badtrainwreck t1_j8upqrl wrote

If you create the nonprofit, and within its bylaws you’re an employee who just runs the nonprofit, then your child can take control just by being the next employee in line to takeover. It’s not a gift it’s a job.

Let’s not overcomplicate this, whomever is in control of the board is in control. How you gain control does not need to be a gift or an inheritance.

You said it’s illegal to promote a for profit business as a nonprofit, but what does promote mean? It’s about not letting your left hand know what your right hand is doing. Coca-Cola works with the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation to increase the number of farmers producing the ingredients they need for their products. The charity is just doing charitable work and the Coca-Cola company is just donating money to a charity.

You say a nonprofit can’t lobby, not all lobbying is lobby the way we see it, it can simply be the bill and Melinda gates foundation holding a fundraiser to help with increasing access to vaccines and a few politicians attend to increase their healthcare credentials and rub shoulders with rich and powerful donors.

It’s not about everything being illegal, but it’s about creating environments in which the parties involved benefit.


Badtrainwreck t1_j8ukdfe wrote

If you’re a lawyer, then you know the ways in which people abuse nonprofits, but you haven’t stated anything in how they abuse them, you’ve just essentially said “rich people not bad, they aren’t doing anything illegal.” Then you’ve asked me to explain to you all the basics, which are simple things which you should already know, especially you shouldn’t have been confused by anything since your expertise would inform you even if I’m piss poor at explaining it.

It’s more likely you’re not a lawyer or you’re a lawyer who helps people take advantage of the loopholes that exist and on your spare time you defend what you do on the internet.


Badtrainwreck t1_j8u4fo2 wrote

Some of what I’m saying is the expression of parts of the system, not that every part of it “avoids taxes” we are talking about 501c3s as a whole. The avoiding taxes is from a part of the discussion where instead of my dying and leaving you a company which is at risk of the estate tax, I can create an entity which I give you control over and it avoids the tax, because it’s not longer inheritance it’s just transferring control of the create entity.

The IRS says you can be reasonably compensated, but again this isn’t the point or the issue, because what billionaire is “reasonably compensated” because Jeff Bezos is paid 88,840 but is that the limits of his worth? If salary is the end all be all then I’m absolutely wrong, but if you’re a major shareholder of a company, and you donate money as a write off to a company that then spends that money on increasing the value of your asset, raising the value of the charitable work they do on the books and they transfer that into stronger lobbying ties then you’re still using a nonprofit in a legal way that is still in your own interest.

That’s the problem, not billionaire bad, not system broken I now cry, but nonprofits have almost no real oversight and there are plenty which operate as if they are for profit organizations.

This is just about the fact that there is a real system in which nonprofits can be useful for enriching yourself


Badtrainwreck t1_j8towtc wrote

It’s not rich people bad, it’s not about buying a yacht for wealthy person to use, you’re using my thrown out example to explain to you the basics of something as literal.

People and organizations with a lot of stocks, use that stocks to buy an asset, they then take loans against that asset. Nothing stops a nonprofit from buying property, nothing says they can only own specific assets.

investing in property is a normal way to protect wealth. It’s not rich people bad, it’s this is what’s normal. You might not like it but the difference between a nonprofit and a profit driven organization is that a for profit institutions goals is to increase profit for its shareholders. A nonprofit can do the exact same but instead be used to drive wages for the workers.

I’ve remodeled a nursing home which no longer existed but their paperwork was still there, that’s how I learned the not for profit was being used to fund the director because the director purchased the property the nursing home operated on, the nursing home took care of all maintenance and costs, and the director just took a large amount in rent. Very legal, very normal, very much a for profit hidden as a nonprofit


Badtrainwreck t1_j8szbao wrote

That’s specifically why I said you can follow the trail if you want, there are several articles you can find about billionaires and how they use charities.

This is an example of a billionaire who honestly has done something as close to good as a billionaire can, but the truth is in the way he donated his business, he still has ultimate control over it because he controls the charity, so if it is used for good (as he has used it for good in the past, there’s no reason to question him in my opinion) is up to him, but the reality is if he wanted then he can just do what he wants.

You’ll see this also in how billionaires setup trusts and nonprofits for their children to control which contain within them all their finances and businesses. It’s just piecing together the 1000 loopholes in the system.

I can’t send you one article because there is no one article that says all this that I know of, but just google how billionaires used charity’s and you’ll find many reputable sources who speak about this.

Taking out loans for example is just how billionaires operate, purchasing a yacht by using stock as collateral and then using the yacht as an asset for future loans in which gives them access to an eternal loan of almost no interest. When they give stock to a charity, the charity can act in the same way, because of loopholes within the system

Edit: if you don’t think this is possible, and you’re just trying to argue with me because you disagree then please feel free to not respond any further, but if you’re genuinely interested and willing to take some time to look into shit also then I could find more things later on after work, but I don’t want to waste my time on someone who is just going to say “naw” no matter what.


Badtrainwreck t1_j8srvgm wrote

This is the info just off the website of the foundation, you can follow the trail of you want, but it’s all just linked to nonprofits being used to increase stock value, and while packaged to look like they are just helping small businesses grow and make more money from selling to a particular corporation.


Badtrainwreck t1_j8q3ftd wrote

Based on how the legal system works (and how billionaires like Bill Gates and others use them) he likely setup a 501c3 that he fully controls, donated money to himself to avoid taxes, and since the charity is in control of Tesla stocks, it can use those stocks to take loans in which it pays the lowest interest rates, then that charity will create programs that appear to help underprivileged communities, but in reality the focus will be in driving up the value of the Tesla stock within its possession. This can of course have benefits for others but not even close to the valuation of the stock it holds.


Badtrainwreck t1_j6gwhou wrote

So when they were debating outlawing spoofing phone numbers they said that it’s protecting prank calls to allow people to change their number, obviously we know it’s the donors who operate the robocalls that politicians wanted to save, but my answer to this is simple.

You shouldn’t be able to spoof your number without paying a 1$ tax. That way prank calls can continue and robocalls are forced away from this. Then use that $1 tax for funding emergency service dispatchers because their funds are drying up from changes to the cellphone industry.


Badtrainwreck t1_j6eeyds wrote

TikTok recently got called out for the fact that it gives almost all of its employees the ability to manually increase the reach a video makes, obviously they want this for building brand relations but the fact that they don’t have more controls and a better outline for when it can be utilized shows that they aren’t really in the business to do this the right way.

But, I’m sure you if you at any of the other competitors you’ll find they are just as bad. Corporate greed is at the forefront and nothing else