[removed]

inserts first world problems meme but photoshops a monocle and top hat onto the woman

What an idiot.

As if that'll stop them from tracking his movements.

We are gonna track him even harder now.

[deleted]

[removed]

They never do these things for the right reasons. Just so people will let them be their sociopathic billionaire selves.

I have pinpointed his location using the technology we all use secretly that billionaires haven't discovered yet.

[removed]

Too much air travel is bad for you anyways.. background radiation gets pretty bad the higher up you go.

[deleted]

Why would they do them for the right reasons, anyway? You don't get wealthy by being a good person.

He’s the second richest man in the world. You don’t get there and stay there without being absolutely batshit and doing some evil stuff. It comes with the territory of being that obscenely rich.

>On the LVMH-owned podcast released Monday, Arnault admitted that the LVMH group “had a plane, and we sold it.” He added: “The result now is that no one can see where I go because I rent planes when I use private planes.”

He won't be emitting any less carbon.

Buy 2 jets. Fly them in the opposite direction. Problem solved. Lease planes and change them every 8-12 months. Problem solved.

Bingo. I see u !!!!

[removed]

To be fair this is how I would travel if I had the money….until then I hate that guy

Your logic severely flawed. I’m seeing black and white, for sure, and possibly…. …no true Scotsman…?

Your logic severely flawed. I’m seeing black and white, for sure, and possibly…. …no true Scotsman…?

[removed]

So how he's gonna be tracked?

He said he'll just rent private jets now instead of owning one so he cannot be tracked, so yeah no noble reason, quite the opposite.

I wonder what the second poorest man is up to?

Still probably the only private jet heading where he needs to be and when. Probably was tired of paying all the ownership fees that come with it. He's no less trackable now.

[removed]

[removed]

Problem solved.

So you're telling us it's working?

Posting comments on reddit

A smarter move for him is to borrow from other rich people jets when they are not using it.

Freedom’s just another word

it's still heading to the right direction though, i don't care what the motives are, as long as we can pressure them to do less harm, I'm ok about it

that's still better tho, at least he won't have a whole ass jet lying around being useless

I mean if I was a billionaire you can bet your ass I'll buy a private jet.

Why wouldn't you?

I bet he just hates any time he’s referred to as the “second richest man”.

I agree with your comment about the picture, might as well catch him mid-sneeze really looking like a goblin, but second richest man still reads as second most selfish man to me.

There is no such thing as an ethical billionaire.

Didn’t Steve Jobs lease a new car every 6 months so he never had to have license plates on his car?

Is not wanting to be tracked by randos on Twitter not a right reason?

I have a theory that Manson was too f’ed in the head to really plan those murders and the family just knew that they could pin them on him because he’d be too incompetent to defend himself in court

Being one of the richest people in world, he can even go farther and get ten jets.

What is the net worth where it becomes impossible to be ethical?

right now he'll just lease some corporate jet and remain anonymous.

Hey cousin, it’s me, your second poorest man

[removed]

Mf looks like Mr Burns

[removed]

[removed]

Don't worry, Elon's working on destroying himself with this Twitter buyout

Just because it sounds true or feels right doesn’t make it logically sound.

Wow -25. Lmao. There’s a lotta ppl butt hurt about their appropriate dislike of greedy assholes.

Listen, I agree that to be an ethical billionaire is a NEAR impossibility. But to say there are NONE. That’s flawed af. And I don’t give a rats ass if a bunch of overly-emotional simpletons on Reddit agree or not.

Yeah. He sold that plane, because there was too much evidence splattered all over it than could be cleaned up reliably.

It’s fact buddy. The closest we have to ethical billionaires are musicians and athletes where their value is created directly be their own individual labor, but even then they sign brand deals with companies that operate on sweat shops and exploitative labor.

Who’s to say? I’d probably argue that a majority of athletes and musicians are ethically rich because their value is a direct result of their personal labor and talents. That goes out the window for a lot of athletes when they start signing brand deals with companies like Nike that use sweat shop labor. You’d really have to take it case by case, analyze what is making them their money and whether it’s dependent on exploitation at any point along the supply chain.

A large factor in the “no ethical billionaires” ideology is that purposely avoiding paying an equal share of taxes is inherently unethical, despite being legal and encouraged in our current system. Warren Buffett and the Waltons pay a lower actual tax rate than a McDonald’s drive through worker, despite their businesses depending on numerous public services like roads to transport their goods, GPS that runs their logistics, public schools that educate its workforce and so many others.

You are to say. You said that people with billions in networth can not be ethical. So then, where is the line? Is it in the hundreds of millions? Tens of millions? Or just in the billions?

You’re being intentionally obtuse. People like you have a hard time grasping the concept of a spectrum. You take something with rolling variables and demand an exact, fixed metric with which to measure, when there simply isn’t one. The number at which people themselves become unethical is incredibly individualistic and is determined by their actions, not an arbitrary number they reach along the way to a billion.

Just ball park it man.

Did you even read my response?

No, they didn’t

Your response invalidates your claim.

How so?

It doesn’t work like that, you would do so poorly in an economics course that you would fail out.

Sharp as a tack aren't we? You come with a warning?

Wrong. He stated in the article that he is just renting jets now, instead of flying one owned directly by his company.

Outfits like NetJets and other luxury aircraft rentals just add a layer of plausible deniability in between him and the flights

why would i care if he have plausible deniability or not, the bottomline is that there's less jet that are more used often. The jet fuel might amount to be the same but maintenance cost also release emission

I'm not here trying to defend billionaire, I'm here trying to celebrate all the small wins we can have, and push further. Just being cynical at any effort or concession won't actually help anyone