• tabarnaski@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 days ago

    I might be mistaken, but I’m pretty sure about half of this 0.1% are women. The ultra rich aren’t single and they have kids.

    I agree with you that gender discrimination is one of the many ways to divide the people, but I don’t see how healing the gender divide will end the growing wealth inequality.

    • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 days ago

      You agree that it’s a way to divide people, but you don’t think more united people will help against wealth inequality?

        • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          17 days ago

          This is such a non-sequitur that I’m really not sure what it means. Care to enlighten? Is the “joke” that I am a woman and therefore must change my clothes often? Not your best work

    • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      You are mistaken. It’s wrong to think that just because they’re married their wives have meaningful control of any finances. It’s easy to see, for example, when they separate. Gates and Bezos’ former spouses took about 10% of their respective fortunes. Musk is single, lol. Putin is also single, but do you really imagine he ever let his wife make a decision?

      Those are cherry picked examples, sure, but you can go down the list of billionaires and see that they are divorced much more often than you think, and their wealth doesn’t change much in the divorce.

      More basically, the men are the ones on the list, aren’t they.

      Their children also don’t have that kind of power until their parents die or at least get old enough to start succession planning, and they certainly don’t have control of the money.