Crazy. I never thought her stuff was so successful.
Currently estimated worth of $900 million (a conservative estimate according to Forbes).

I clown that family for acting like fools. But they know business

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesdigitalcovers/2018/07/11/how-20-year-old-kylie-jenner-built-a-900-million-fortune-in-less-than-3-years/

_______________________________________

------------------------------

17x NBA Champions

_______________________________________

Hardly qualified as hitting a home run.

Not to detract from what she did with that head start. I applaud it, in fact, because that's precisely what should and can be done with that sort of head start.

Oprah was "self made".
Will Smith.

KJ maximized the wealth of opportunity and privilege at her disposal. Good for her, and again, I applaud it. But the accomplishment should be discussed within the terms of her maximizing the possibilities enabled by the treasure trove head start she has been given.

Calling her self made isn't just a semantic lapse. It's blshit. nonsense. A lie. And should not be used.

>Hardly qualified as hitting a home run.
>
>Not to detract from what she did with that head start. I
>applaud it, in fact, because that's precisely what should and
>can be done with that sort of head start.
>
>Oprah was "self made".
>Will Smith.
>
>KJ maximized the wealth of opportunity and privilege at her
>disposal. Good for her, and again, I applaud it. But the
>accomplishment should be discussed within the terms of her
>maximizing the possibilities enabled by the treasure trove
>head start she has been given.
>
>Calling her self made isn't just a semantic lapse. It's
>blshit. nonsense. A lie. And should not be used.
>

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

...and $8 million in seed money from her peoples (c) Get Hard.

------

12 play and 12 planets are enlighten for all the Aliens to Party and free those on the Sex Planet-maxxx

XBL: trkc21
Twitter: @tyrcasey

Is it not her company?

_______________________________________

but she damn sure gets kudo's for focusing on lip kits.. not sure what that is but she could've done purses, earrings, rings, etc..

I"m sure she had a team around her and they prolly helped filter all those ideas into what this is but shit, if it's 100% hers she damn sure did something right.

and I hate this family..lol

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

Also, "self made" doesn't mean anything. There's no such thing as a self-made billionaire.

Hopefully soon, they'll also be no such thing as a billionaire.

______________________________

"Walleye, a lot of things are going to go wrong in your life that technically aren't your fault. Always remember that this doesn't make you any less of an idiot"

--Walleye's Dad

>Hopefully soon, they'll also be no such thing as a
>billionaire.


______________________________________________________________________________

"To Each His Reach"

but.....

Fuck aliens.

<--- #LoveCitees

message brought to you by...

www.onustees.com

>Actually, I've probably haven't thought about it as extensively as most, but I've often thought about that too.

At some point someone's gonna have to hit the reset button on all this shit. Either that, or there's gotta be another huge depression so that everything is brought back down to reasonableness.

Scary thing is this. Unbridled capitalism is not sustainable. But we're talking about sustainable in terms of human history. Which means even if/when all this shit blows up, it'll take a while. Maybe a few decades more. Maybe another couple hundred of years.


______________________________________________________________________________

"To Each His Reach"

but.....

Fuck aliens.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

... while people die because they're broke.

Somebody should take her money. The federal government, ideally. It'd be good for her soul. And so it's clear that I'm not picking on her - same thing goes for that doofus from Papa Johns and Elon Musk and basically any rich asshole whether they've been part of the world's dumbest news cycle lately or not.

Honestly, it should be an honor to all of these billionaires that we're emulating them: confiscating their wealth and closing off their access to political influence is exactly what they've done to everybody else.

______________________________

"Walleye, a lot of things are going to go wrong in your life that technically aren't your fault. Always remember that this doesn't make you any less of an idiot"

--Walleye's Dad

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/06/its-basically-just-immoral-to-be-rich

A reminder that people who possess great wealth in a time of poverty are directly causing that poverty…

by A.Q. SMITH
Here is a simple statement of principle that doesn’t get repeated enough: if you possess billions of dollars, in a world where many people struggle because they do not have much money, you are an immoral person. The same is true if you possess hundreds of millions of dollars, or even millions of dollars. Being extremely wealthy is impossible to justify in a world containing deprivation.

Even though there is a lot of public discussion about inequality, there seems to be far less talk about just how patently shameful it is to be rich. After all, there are plenty of people on this earth who die—or who watch their loved ones die—because they cannot afford to pay for medical care. There are elderly people who become homeless because they cannot afford rent. There are children living on streets and in cars, there are mothers who can’t afford diapers for their babies. All of this is beyond dispute. And all of it could be ameliorated if people who had lots of money simply gave those other people their money. It’s therefore deeply shameful to be rich. It’s not a morally defensible thing to be.

To take a U.S. example: white families in America have 16 times as much wealth on average as black families. This is indisputably because of slavery, which was very recent (there are people alive today who met people who were once slaves). Larry Ellison of Oracle could put his $55 billion in a fund that could be used to just give houses to black families, not quite as direct “reparations” but simply as a means of addressing the fact that the average white family has a house while the average black family does not. But instead of doing this, Larry Ellison bought the island of Lanai. (It’s kind of extraordinary that a single human being can just own the sixth-largest Hawaiian island, but that’s what concentrated wealth leads to.) Because every dollar you have is a dollar you’re not giving to somebody else, the decision to retain wealth is a decision to deprive others.

Note that this is a slightly different point than the usual ones made about rich people. For example, it is sometimes claimed that CEOs get paid too much, or that the super-wealthy do not pay enough in taxes. My claim has nothing to do with either of these debates. You can hold my position and simultaneously believe that CEOs should get paid however much a company decides to pay them, and that taxes are a tyrannical form of legalized theft. What I am arguing about is not the question of how much people should be given, but the morality of their retaining it after it is given to them.

Many times, defenses of the accumulation of great wealth depend on justifications for the initial acquisition of that wealth. The libertarian-ish philosopher Robert Nozick gave a well-known hypothetical that is used to challenge claims that wealthy people did not deserve their wealth: suppose millions of people enjoy watching Wilt Chamberlain play basketball. And suppose, Nozick wrote, that each of these people would happily give Wilt Chamberlain 25 cents for the privilege of watching him play basketball. And suppose that through the process of people paying Wilt Chamberlain, he ended up with millions of dollars, while each of his audience members had (willingly) sacrificed a quarter. Even though Wilt Chamberlain is now far richer than anyone else in the society, would anyone say that his acquisition of wealth was unjust?

Libertarians use this example to rebut attempts to say that the rich do not deserve their wealth. After all, they say, the process by which those rich people attained their wealth is totally consensual. We’d have to be crazy Stalinists to believe that I shouldn’t have the right to pay you a quarter to watch you play basketball. Why, look at Mark Zuckerberg. Nobody has to use Facebook. He is rich because people like the product he came up with. Clearly, his wealth is the product of his own labor, and nobody should deprive him of it. People on the right often defend wealth along these lines. I earned it, therefore it’s not unfair for me to have it.

But there is a separate question that this defense ignores: regardless of whether you have earned it, to what degree are you morally permitted to retain it? The question of getting and the question of keeping are distinct. As a parallel: if I come into possession of an EpiPen, and I encounter a child experiencing a severe allergic reaction, the question of whether I am obligated to inject the child is distinguishable from the question of whether I obtained the pen legitimately. It’s important to be clear about these distinctions, because we might answer questions about systems differently than we answer questions about individual behavior. (“I don’t hate capitalism, I just hate rich people” is a perfectly legitimate and consistent perspective.)

I therefore think there is a sort of deflection that goes on with defenses of wealth. If we find it appalling that there are so many rich people in a time of need, we are asked to consider questions of acquisition rather than questions of retention. The retention question, after all, is much harder for a wealthy person to answer. It’s one thing to argue that you got rich legitimately. It’s another to explain why you feel justified in spending your wealth upon houses and sculptures rather than helping some struggling people pay their rent or paying off a bunch of student loans or saving thousands of people from dying of malaria. There may be nothing unseemly about the process by which a basketball player earns his millions (we can debate this). But there’s certainly something unseemly about having those millions.

One of the reasons wealthy people rarely have to defend their choices is that “shaming the rich” is not really compatible with any of the predominating political perspectives. People on the right obviously believe that having piles of wealth is fine. Centrist Democrats can’t attack rich people for being rich because they’re increasingly a party for rich people. And socialists (this is the interesting case) tend to believe that questions about the morality of having wealth are relatively unimportant, because they are far more interested in how the state divides up wealth than in what individuals choose to do with it. As G.A. Cohen points out in If You’re an Egalitarian, How Come You’re So Rich?, Marxists have been concerned with eliminating capitalism generally, which has kept them from thinking about questions of the justice of people’s personal choices. After all, if the problem of inequality is systemic, and rich people do not really make choices but pursue their class interests, then asking whether it is moral for wealthy people to retain their wealth is both irrelevant (because individual decisions don’t affect the systemic problem) and incoherent (because the idea of a moral or immoral capitalist makes no sense in the Marxist framework). In fact, there is a certain leftist argument that giving away wealth in the form of charity is actually bad, because it allows capitalism to look superficially generous without actually altering the balance of power in the society. “The worst slave owners were those who were kind to their slaves, because they prevented the core of the system from being realized by those who suffered from it,” as Oscar Wilde ludicrously put it. (In their book Blueprints for a Sparkling Tomorrow, Nimni and Robinson parody this perspective by portraying two leftist academics who insist on being rude to servers in restaurants, on the grounds that being polite to them obscures the true brutality of class relations.)

But I think it is a mistake to avoid inquiring into the moral justifications for wealth. This is because I think individual decisions do matter, because if I am an extremely wealthy man I could be helping a lot of people who I am choosing not to help. And for those people, at least, it makes a difference when a billionaire decides to retain their wealth rather than rid themselves of it.

Of course, when you start talking about whether it is moral to be rich, you end up heading down some difficult logical paths. If I am obligated to use my wealth to help people, am I not obligated to keep doing so until I am myself a pauper? Surely this obligation attaches to anyone who consumes luxuries they do not need, or who has some savings that they are not spending on malaria treatment for children. But the central point I want to make here is that the moral duty becomes greater the more wealth you have. If you end up with a $50,000 a year or $100,000 a year salary, we can debate what amount you should spend on helping other people. But if you earn $250,000 or 1 million, it’s quite clear that the bulk of your income should be given away. You can live very comfortably on $100,000 or so and have luxury and indulgence, so anything beyond is almost indisputably indefensible. And the super-rich, the infamous “millionaires and billionaires”, are constantly squandering resources that could be used to create wonderful and humane things. If you’re a billionaire, you could literally open a hospital and make it free. You could buy up a bunch of abandoned Baltimore rowhouses, do them up, and give them to families. You could help make sure no child ever had to go without lunch.

We can define something like a “maximum moral income” beyond which it’s obviously inexcusable not to give away all of your money. It might be 5o thousand. Call it 100, though. Per person. With an additional 50 allowed per child. This means two parents with a child can still earn $250,000! That’s so much money. And you can keep it. But everyone who earns anything beyond it is obligated to give the excess away in its entirety. The refusal to do so means intentionally allowing others to suffer, a statement which is true regardless of whether you “earned” or “deserved” the income you were originally given. (Personally, I think the maximum moral income is probably much lower, but let’s just set it here so that everyone can agree on it. I do tend to think that moral requirements should be attainable in practice, and a $30k threshold would actually require people experience some deprivation whereas a $100k threshold indisputably still leaves you with an incredibly comfortable lifestyle better than almost any other had by anyone in history.)

Of course, wealthy people do give away money, but so often in piecemeal and self-interested and foolish ways. They’ll donate to colleges with huge endowments to get needless buildings built and named after them. David Geffen will pay to open a school for the children of wealthy university faculty, and somehow be praised for it. Mark Zuckerberg will squander millions of dollars trying to fix Newark’s schools by hiring $1000-a-day-consultants. Brad Pitt will try to build homes for Katrina victims in New Orleans, but will insist that they’re architecturally cutting-edge and funky looking, instead of just trying to make as many simple houses as possible. Just as the rich can’t be trusted to spend their money well generally, they’re colossally terrible at giving it away. This is because so much is about self-aggrandizement, and “philanthropy” is far more about the donor than the donee. Furthermore, if you’re a multi-billionaire, giving away $1 billion is morally meaningless. If you’ve got $3 billion, and you give away 1, you’re still incredibly wealthy, and thus still harming many people through your retention of wealth. You have to get rid of all of it, beyond the maximum moral income.

The central point, however, is this: it is not justifiable to retain vast wealth. This is because that wealth has the potential to help people who are suffering, and by not helping them you are letting them suffer. It does not make a difference whether you earned the vast wealth. The point is that you have it. And whether or not we should raise the tax rates, or cap CEO pay, or rearrange the economic system, we should all be able to acknowledge, before we discuss anything else, that it is immoral to be rich. That much is clear.
______________________________________________________________________________

"To Each His Reach"

but.....

Fuck aliens.

Everybody in my family except for my grandmother and me studied economics and/or business. Until recently (and that piece was hugely formative) I didn't think that meant I had any opinion to offer to a broader discussion of distribution of wealth. And maybe I don't. But Marx put such a morally clear narrative thrust on what's typically disguised as a purely economic discussion: we've accepted the rules of free market capitalism in the same way that we've accepted natural laws like gravity, but they're not the same. Furthermore, it always felt wrong that the left spent decades surrendering the language of morality to the right when it's such an effective and emotionally resonant way to make a point: being rich is wrong.

______________________________

"Walleye, a lot of things are going to go wrong in your life that technically aren't your fault. Always remember that this doesn't make you any less of an idiot"

--Walleye's Dad

Furthermore, it
>always felt wrong that the left spent decades surrendering the
>language of morality to the right when it's such an effective
>and emotionally resonant way to make a point: being rich is
>wrong.

Rest In Peace, Bad News Brown

___________________

Mar-A-Lago delenda est

She was born into a multi-million dollar family. That's a huge advantage for someone wanting to start their own business or whatever.

Her older sisters kicked down the doors for her. Another huge advantage. She didn't have to make, earn or cultivate any contacts in the industry.

I'm not saying she doesn't deserve it. I honestly wouldn't know. If her product or whatever is blowing up and it's the hot thing, more power to her. But the idea that she's "self-made" is wildly deceiving an dishonest.

> I'm not saying she doesn't deserve it.

No human should have that much money.

______________________________

"Walleye, a lot of things are going to go wrong in your life that technically aren't your fault. Always remember that this doesn't make you any less of an idiot"

--Walleye's Dad

>No human should have that much money.

Hoarding wealth harms people.

______________________________

"Walleye, a lot of things are going to go wrong in your life that technically aren't your fault. Always remember that this doesn't make you any less of an idiot"

--Walleye's Dad

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

------

12 play and 12 planets are enlighten for all the Aliens to Party and free those on the Sex Planet-maxxx

XBL: trkc21
Twitter: @tyrcasey

Examples: Walton family own majority of Walmart. Not self made.

Zuckerberg built FB. Self made
Bezos built Amazon. self made
Jenner built this make up company. Self made

She had advantages that most don't have. No doubt. But that does not take away from the fact that she started a company and built it up to be successful.

Without this company, she would just be a famous sister in a famous family. She made herself a billionaire.
There are plenty of people with advantages who are doing nothing with them.

_______________________________________

Like I said, it's a weird term to begin with, so use it however you want. But it's really weird thinking of any of these people as "self-made."

------

12 play and 12 planets are enlighten for all the Aliens to Party and free those on the Sex Planet-maxxx

XBL: trkc21
Twitter: @tyrcasey

Didn't realize this post will be all about disputing the meaning of one word

_______________________________________

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

Capital doesn't do the work. People do. That money should be theirs, equally.

______________________________

"Walleye, a lot of things are going to go wrong in your life that technically aren't your fault. Always remember that this doesn't make you any less of an idiot"

--Walleye's Dad

I don't know how we got here lol

_______________________________________

Lots of people worked for these giant piles of money. We've already seen what happens when we limit the discussion of what ought to be done about that fact to economists.

edit: to be clear, we're not about to talk about it because I'm at the limit of my qualifications as soon as I get close to acknowledging "yes" to that question. Like if menu items are written in French. I can read them and understand them, but I'm sure as hell not trying to say them out loud to a native speaker.

______________________________

"Walleye, a lot of things are going to go wrong in your life that technically aren't your fault. Always remember that this doesn't make you any less of an idiot"

--Walleye's Dad

while I think folks should be compensated fairly ain't no damn way someone putting caps on lipstick tubes in a shop should have equal pay with a creative director or VP of the company.

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

why is walleye's statement hyperbolic but financial inflation is aspirational?

this is a post, after all, celebrating someone who got from being associated with 9 figures to being associated with 10 figures. that's funny money. does it even improve her life?

People always argue "Bezos deserves a higher salary than the guy delivering Amazon packages." But I never hear people break down why Bezos needs *that much higher* a salary.

Right now, Bezos makes 275 million a day, while COUNTLESS employees of his, the people who do the labor to put the money in Bezos's pocket, struggle to make ends meet.

There are roughly 566,000 Amazon employees. If Bezos said, "I'm content earning 100 million a day and redistributing the extra equally," then everyone Amazon employee would make nearly 9500 dollars a month more in pre-tax revenue. The median Amazon employees earns 28,446 dollars per year-- so if Bezos did this, then, after taxes (and assuming that $28.5 thousand is after tax, which is almost certainly is not), even his *median* earning employees would see their salaries more than double. Most employees would be earning more like 2.5-3 times their current salary.

AND THAT'S ASSUMING BEZOS NEEDS TO MAKE ONE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS A DAY, lol.

I personally don't have a problem with the theory that the CEO should earn more than an employee. But it should be WAAAAAY closer to "CEOs earn the same money as the labor force workers" than to "CEOS should earn billions while labor force workers can't earn a livable wage." Way way way way WAY closer. The current system is not only immoral, but it's unsustainable. The equal salaries across the board route is light years closer to what we need than the current one.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

I'm all for increasing pay

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

and she has lived most of her life on TV so it makes sense

she is like those weird twins from back in the day.

and full lips are much easier to buy then full ass

so much money in make up yo...

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

It's not like Zuck didn't have all sorts of advisors.

I do think these are the type of headlines we see during bubble times.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Like Walleye said, it's kind of a bullshit term.

------

12 play and 12 planets are enlighten for all the Aliens to Party and free those on the Sex Planet-maxxx

XBL: trkc21
Twitter: @tyrcasey

Granted, he had Harvard contacts to start out with. But at least he started his shit himself. And he had the skills to do what he wanted to do. He wasn't just the idea man who got others to do the actual work.

But- he was at an Ivy, so that afforded him contacts and capital most don't have access to that early in entrepreneurship.
______________________________________________________________________________

"To Each His Reach"

but.....

Fuck aliens.

>But at least he started his shit himself.

Like, I know The Social Network was exaggerated, but what role did Eduardo Saverin/the Winkelvoss twins actually play IRL?

------

12 play and 12 planets are enlighten for all the Aliens to Party and free those on the Sex Planet-maxxx

XBL: trkc21
Twitter: @tyrcasey

I read an article once that talked about the differences between the movie and real life. The movie was exaggerated a bit, but one thing no one disputes is that he was a pretty intelligent dude with good (not genius though) skills coding-wise.

Besides. There are a shit ton of people with all the same access to money and friends that he had, and they didn't invent shit, much less Facebook (and i say this knowing full well this dude didn't invent social media and wasn't the first to do what he did.)

But from what I've read, yeah, this dude had some advantages, but he took full advantage of them and leveraged shit at the right place and the right time.
______________________________________________________________________________

"To Each His Reach"

but.....

Fuck aliens.

of course he made it better but still, he didn't even come up with the initial idea.

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

I mean, by the same token, it's not like twin's idea was original either. We already had Friendster, Myspace, Blackplanet, Migente and who knows what else by the time FB came along.

I don't think an idea has to be totally original for him to claim being self made.

I mean, if I quit my job today and opened a bakery, started selling bread nationwide and was wildly successful, am I not self-made cause I didn't invent bread itself?
______________________________________________________________________________

"To Each His Reach"

but.....

Fuck aliens.

forgot about that one

and you did it without them and became a billionaire.

Let’s be honest. You didn’t do that shit by yourself.

My thing is people came to him with an idea. If they never came to him does he make Facebook on his own? Doubt it.

Just sayin’

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

An idea is not a business.. or a program.. or printed money..

Just check the patent office around the time any invention or innovation happens...

there are mad light bulb patents.. one won

Double 0
DJ/Producer/Artist
Producer in Kidz In The Hall
-------------------------------------------
twitter: @godouble0
IG: @godouble0
www.thinklikearapper.com

>and you did it without them and became a billionaire.
>
>Let’s be honest. You didn’t do that shit by yourself.

Neither did they. They should have learned how to bake instead of taking their idea to someone who could actually do it.

And I just give more credit to the people who actually put the work in.


______________________________________________________________________________

"To Each His Reach"

but.....

Fuck aliens.

___________________

Mar-A-Lago delenda est

He had familial stability and a fund he could dip into.

He also had the luxury of cultivating his relative genius in relative comfort. Said luxury and comfort was afforded him, not created by him.

...would they be 'self made' as well, even though the *main* reason that anyone ever payed any attention to them at all is the fact that they are Will & Jada's kids?

Is Donald Trump 'self made?'

he had a very basic upbringing compared to what he's been able to achieve.

I know everyone's in this semantic rabbit hole in here about how self made doesn't really exist, which i guess is technically correct, but I think (or at least thought lol) there was a fairly universally agreed upon definition to what people consider self made

I do think, however, that calling Kylie self made is, at best, a stretch. Good on her for the accomplishment, tho.

If Jaden is able to take advantage of all these amazing connections and opportunities that hardly anyone has, and springboards them into doing something huge I see no reason to shit on it or not applaud it, unless HE's running around calling himself self-made. There's a huge difference in how is father grinded his way up. But as far as I know Kylie isn't calling herself self made either. headlines are.

My math says she did EXACTLY what she was supposed to... to the tune of a billion dollars at 21 years old. Self made or not, that shit is huge.

Because these were his comments on Jaden Smith:

"I resent this talentless product of Nepotism sooo much
You can pick any random kid from any art high school here in NYC and they would be way more talented and worthier of the attention than this kid.
****Can we all start by admitting we would not know anything about this kid if Will Smith wasn't his dad?"****

http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13206798&mesg_id=13206798&listing_type=search#13206892

Notice there's complete vitriol for the rich Black kid, but none at all for the white one? He also requested that we START with the idea that no one would know Jaden if not for Will. No such request was made for Kylie tho.
Just an observation.

~
~
~
~
~
Days like this I miss Sha Mecca

It’s wild how we hold our own people to different standards than white folks and don’t even realize it half the time.

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

>Because these were his comments on Jaden Smith:
>
>"I resent this talentless product of Nepotism sooo much
>You can pick any random kid from any art high school here in
>NYC and they would be way more talented and worthier of the
>attention than this kid.
>****Can we all start by admitting we would not know anything
>about this kid if Will Smith wasn't his dad?"****
>
>http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13206798&mesg_id=13206798&listing_type=search#13206892
>
>Notice there's complete vitriol for the rich Black kid, but
>none at all for the white one? He also requested that we
>START with the idea that no one would know Jaden if not for
>Will. No such request was made for Kylie tho.
>Just an observation.


The forbes list has a very specific meaning for "Self-Made" when it comes to billionaires. In fact, the have scale from 1 to 10 to define exactly how self-made a person is. "- a 1 indicating the fortune was completely inherited, while a 10 was for a Horatio Alger-esque journey."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2014/10/02/the-new-forbes-400-self-made-score-from-silver-spooners-to-boostrappers/#63804e942aff

On such a scale, Kylie would be between a 5 and a 7 (Arguably 5 if her fortune came mostly from her reality tv work, hopwever I would lean closer to 7 if her fortune is based mostly on her cosmetics business). That determination has nothing to do with how vapid or talentless I think she is. It just solely based on where her money comes from.

Zuck would be an 8. Oprah 10. I also think it's not practical to argue that a person coming from a middle to upperclass background isn't self-made. If that's the case the list would probably only be Oprah and a couple of Asian dudes (though it does make their wealth the most impressive to me).



Anyway my point is that calling someone "self-made" is an objective assessment based on how much money a person inherited and leveraged into their current wealth. That's all.

And it also has nothing to do with what sort of help a person had in creating their wealth. There isn't a "self-made" billionaire on the list that didn't have help, advisors, partners to get on the list, including Oprah.


Me saying that Kylie is self-made doesn't mean I think she's an awesome person or even think she is all that great of a business person, like I mentioned before her wealth suggests to me we are in frothy market times when you start seeing all sorts of people who don't seem particularly talented or smart turn up as super rich (at least on paper, hence my bubble remark).

As far as Jaiden, I didn't pass judgement of him as a human being. he sounds like a good kid, I just think he is a shitty talentless artist whose music we would have never heard of if it wasn't for his parents. If he managed to become a billionaire from music, he would probably be a 4 or 5 from the list. If he ventured off and did his own thing outside of music and became a billionaire, he'd be somewhere between a 5 - 7. If Will and Jada become billionaires and Die or write Jaden a check that makes him a billionaire, he'd be a 1.

It's that simple, it's not a value judgement, it's an objective reality.


Anyway, keep trying one day you will get a shot off. Maybe if you devote more time digging through my old post you will find my "I hate black people and the white man is god" post.






>
>


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Even by Forbes' questionable assessment of the meaning of "self-made" you still have to admit that applying to term to her is questionable if you're saying she could be a 5. I'd say even less since she grew up on camera and used 250,000 from modeling to even get started. That's an assist from the very system we live in... Forbes won't talk about white folks getting a helping hand from white supremacy tho of course... but YOU will talk about Jaden getting a helping hand from Black parents in said system and even RESENT them for it. But you don't resent white folks for riding an entire system? Lol, nigga...


>Anyway my point is that calling someone "self-made" is an
>objective assessment based on how much money a person
>inherited and leveraged into their current wealth. That's all.


Is saying you resent Jaden an objective assessment too? I'll answer that for you, no it's not. Stop trying to pretend like everything you say so level-headed and mature. You didn't launch the same attack on Kylie and we all know why, dude.
Since you said it, this just another of your "I hate black people and the white (wo)man is god" posts.



>As far as Jaiden, I didn't pass judgement of him as a human
>being


You just said you resent him and asked that we start with the fact that he wouldn't be where he is if not for his parents.



>Anyway, keep trying one day you will get a shot off. Maybe if
>you devote more time digging through my old post you will find
>my "I hate black people and the white man is god" post.


I didn't have to dig. I remembered that, because I made the post.
And you went on a little tear where you made it your business to say something negative in anything I posted... so this is where it comes back to bite you in the ass. You don't actually have to say you hate Black people and put whites on a pedestal tho. You're showing us better than you can tell us.

~
~
~
~
~
Days like this I miss Sha Mecca

there is more to this

dude actually posted a video of Will promoting Jaden's album and showing love and used it as proof Jaden sucked.

jealous one's envy

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

>dude actually posted a video of Will promoting Jaden's album
>and showing love and used it as proof Jaden sucked.


That too. You definitely can't pass that off as "objective reality" when the reality wasn't even what he claimed it was lol.

~
~
~
~
~
Days like this I miss Sha Mecca

You are comparing my comments about Jaden's Artisty to my comments about the source of Kylie's wealth.

They have nothing to do with each other. It's apple to oranges.

The Apples to Apples comparison would be I think Jaden's music sucks and Kylie's TV shows are garbage that I have no interest in.

The orange to orange comparison would be that if Jaden made a billion dollars selling records he would be to some degree a self-made billionaire similar to Kylie.

But you are trying to imply that my distate for Jaden's music and acknowledging that Kylie is self-made to some extent is somehow thinking more highly of Kylie than Jaden AND THAT'S FUCKING STUPID.



You got a lot of ideas but they get muddled and you should spend some time teasing out specific points rather than jumping all over the place.


>Even by Forbes' questionable assessment of the meaning of
>"self-made" you still have to admit that applying to term to
>her is questionable if you're saying she could be a 5. I'd
>say even less since she grew up on camera and used 250,000
>from modeling to even get started. That's an assist from the
>very system we live in... Forbes won't talk about white folks
>getting a helping hand from white supremacy tho of course...
>but YOU will talk about Jaden getting a helping hand from
>Black parents in said system and even RESENT them for it. But
>you don't resent white folks for riding an entire system?
>Lol, nigga...


Again, this is so fucking stupid because you are taking music criticism and trying to cram it into my discussion of what constitutes "self-made".

The sclae takes into account how much wealth and business a person inherited but listen if you think there are no self-made billionaires because they all have the help of white supremacy, that's fine. I don't disagree with that. But that's not what anyone was ever talking about.


>
>
>>Anyway my point is that calling someone "self-made" is an
>>objective assessment based on how much money a person
>>inherited and leveraged into their current wealth. That's
>all.
>
>
>Is saying you resent Jaden an objective assessment too?

Of course not. It's my opinion. That's why your point is so fucking stupid.


>>answer that for you, no it's not.

Did I ever say that it was? Why would anyone (you namely) think that it was? Why my dude? Why?

You get yourself worked up on positions that no one is making. It's stupid.


Stop trying to pretend like
>everything you say so level-headed and mature.

You didn't
>launch the same attack on Kylie and we all know why, dude.
>Since you said it, this just another of your "I hate black
>people and the white (wo)man is god" posts.
>
>
>
>>As far as Jaiden, I didn't pass judgement of him as a human
>>being
>
>
>You just said you resent him and asked that we start with the
>fact that he wouldn't be where he is if not for his parents.

To be clear I was talking about his music and his success. In that very post I stated that if his shit was dope, I wouldn't be hating on him. But I find his music wack and his acting terrible, so I resent folks falling all over him like he isn't some talentless hack. Besides his music, he seems like a good kid and wish him well...I just don't want to hear his music or see him act again.


>
>
>
>>Anyway, keep trying one day you will get a shot off. Maybe
>if
>>you devote more time digging through my old post you will
>find
>>my "I hate black people and the white man is god" post.
>
>
>I didn't have to dig. I remembered that, because I made the
>post.
>And you went on a little tear where you made it your business
>to say something negative in anything I posted... so this is
>where it comes back to bite you in the ass. You don't
>actually have to say you hate Black people and put whites on a
>pedestal tho. You're showing us better than you can tell us.


If you think that Jaiden Smith post is some smoking gun, Good for you.





**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

>But you are trying to imply that my distate for
>Jaden's music and acknowledging that Kylie is
>self-made to some extent is somehow thinking
>more highly of Kylie than Jaden


I'm saying you speak about them way differently, and that'll show in your own words below. You can't sidetrack me with all that talking around your BS, so here's your contradiction in your own words.

>The Apples to Apples comparison would be I
> think Jaden's music sucks and Kylie's TV shows
>are garbage that I have no interest in.

>But I find his music wack and his acting terrible,
>so I resent folks falling all over him like he isn't
>some talentless hack

Well if they're both garbage, then why not KTSE when folks are "falling all over" her? Funny you still couldn't bring yourself to call her "talentless" or "shitty" or say that you resent her. PLUS you didn't say you resent folks falling all over Jaden, you said you resent HIM. Now you're switching up what you said.

You did give flipnile his answer in your "oranges to oranges" comparison, but it's mighty funny how you never asked that we "start by admitting we would not know anything about this kid if ________" b/c the resentment you have for Jaden is clearly lacking where Kylie is concerned.

~
~
~
~
~
Days like this I miss Sha Mecca

Again, one discussion is about Jayden's music and success. The other about whether Kylie is self-made or not.




>>But you are trying to imply that my distate for
>>Jaden's music and acknowledging that Kylie is
>>self-made to some extent is somehow thinking
>>more highly of Kylie than Jaden
>
>
>I'm saying you speak about them way differently, and that'll
>show in your own words below. You can't sidetrack me with all
>that talking around your BS, so here's your contradiction in
>your own words.
>
>>The Apples to Apples comparison would be I
>> think Jaden's music sucks and Kylie's TV shows
>>are garbage that I have no interest in.
>
>>But I find his music wack and his acting terrible,
>>so I resent folks falling all over him like he isn't
>>some talentless hack
>
>Well if they're both garbage, then why not KTSE when folks are
>"falling all over" her?

If I were asked the quality of her work, I would say something like I don't know who she is but what I do know is she is trash (I kind of remember something about some tasteless t-shirts with some black people on it). THough I don't know her, I have general hate for all things Kardashian. But that's not what this post is about.

Heck if folks were making the case that she is this brilliant business person I would strongly disagree because I think her success is more a product of luck and family brand and market bubbles more than anything else. But that's not what this post is about.

This post turned into being about whether she is self-made or not, and by the standards of Forbes, she is. That is the only thing I stated ("Naw she's self made"). before you and Legs jumped the gun and worked up a narrative that I suffer from self-hate.

What's the basis for thinking I got self-hate?

Because I previously stated I resent Jaiden Smith's success and I didn't start this post off hating on Kylie's success?

I should start any discussion of any rich kid, no matter what we are discussing, with stating I resent their success because I once said that about a black kid otherwise I am expressing self-hate?

That's fucking Stupid bro.



Funny you still couldn't bring
>yourself to call her "talentless" or "shitty" or say that you
>resent her.

I literally called her "vapid" AND "talentless" in this post. Try Control +F. SMH.


PLUS you didn't say you resent folks falling all
>over Jaden, you said you resent HIM. Now you're switching up
>what you said.

You can argue resent him, his music, his success are all the same, and I'd say sure. But Read the whole post again. I was clearly talking about his success and his music. That's why I made the point about not feeling that way about him if his music were good. I don't think he is a shitty person, I think he is a shitty artist.


>
>You did give flipnile his answer in your "oranges to oranges"
>comparison, but it's mighty funny how you never asked that we
>"start by admitting we would not know anything about this kid
>if ________" b/c the resentment you have for Jaden is clearly
>lacking where Kylie is concerned.

So your whole shit is because I once bad mouth this black rich kid, if I don't say the same thing before discussing any rich white kid I am displaying self-hate?

You trying to hard to win points with that Jaiden post and it's a stretch.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

>Again, one discussion is about Jayden's music and success.
>The other about whether Kylie is self-made or not.


No. The Jaden discussion was about his music, but you made it about whether or not he'd be where he is without his advantages, and how your resentment for HIM stems from those advantages. You even asked that we start by collectively acknowledging his advantages.
This discussion is about Kylie being self-made, but you didn't ask that we collectively acknowledge her advantages? THAT is what doesn't make sense.
And you came in the Jaden post IMMEDIATELY saying that. Couldn't wait to express your resentment. You can't change that now.



>What's the basis for thinking I got self-hate?



I could point this out more often if that's what you want. You seem to consistently fail to realize that it's not just one post that forms folks' opinion of you. Other than that, I'm not the one who accused you of self-hate. I ain't arguing it either tho. I'd sooner call you a "conditioned europhile", since you've actually given us all permission to do so.



>Because I previously stated I resent Jaiden Smith's success
>and I didn't start this post off hating on Kylie's success?



Again, you stated that you resent HIM.
"I resent this talentless product of Nepotism sooo much"



>I should start any discussion of any rich kid, no matter what
>we are discussing, with stating I resent their success because
>I once said that about a black kid otherwise I am expressing
>self-hate?
>
>That's fucking Stupid bro.


AGAIN, you said you resent HIM. You're not gonna make that go away.
But stupid eh? This is exactly the same thing you do to me. NOW it's stupid when you're on the other end of it? These are the terms you set. I hope you're enjoying this banter you so fervently begged for.



>So your whole shit is because I once bad mouth this black rich
>kid, if I don't say the same thing before discussing any rich
>white kid I am displaying self-hate?


Nah, my "whole shit" is that the request you made about Jaden would actually have been warranted in this post (can we start by acknowledging they wouldn't be who they are without_______ ). It wasn't warranted at all in the Jaden post, but I guess that was your "objective" resentment that made you say that about him lol. Total oxymoron.

~
~
~
~
~
Days like this I miss Sha Mecca

>>Again, one discussion is about Jayden's music and success.
>>The other about whether Kylie is self-made or not.
>
>
>No. The Jaden discussion was about his music, but you made it
>about whether or not he'd be where he is without his
>advantages, and how your resentment for HIM stems from those
>advantages. You even asked that we start by collectively
>acknowledging his advantages.
>This discussion is about Kylie being self-made, but you didn't
>ask that we collectively acknowledge her advantages? THAT is
>what doesn't make sense.
>And you came in the Jaden post IMMEDIATELY saying that.
>Couldn't wait to express your resentment. You can't change
>that now.

Again, so your mad my first statement wasn't hate because I did that to Jaden? That's fucking stupid. What's makes it especially stupid is the very next thing I said after saying she was self made (based on the reason I explained) was calling into question that valuation as signs of an overhyped market.

The funny thing I fully expected the discussion to turn into what does self-made mean but I made the first post and got caught up at work and didn't get to return to it much later. I think the discussion would have gone different if I got to chime in earlier but instead you and Legs got to cook.

You jumped the gun because you thought me pointing out she was self-made was some sort of praise of her. You should have actually let me answered flipnile's question before you decided you had your smoking gun.


>
>
>
>>What's the basis for thinking I got self-hate?
>
>
>
>I could point this out more often if that's what you want.
>You seem to consistently fail to realize that it's not just
>one post that forms folks' opinion of you.

Do it. Please. You've got your own history but I at least wait for you to say some shit before I try to call you out on it. Here you assigned to me a position I didn't make an argue against that made up position. Even resorted to digging in the crates to support that made up postion. SMH.

Other than that,
>I'm not the one who accused you of self-hate. I ain't arguing
>it either tho. I'd sooner call you a "conditioned europhile",
>since you've actually given us all permission to do so.
>
>
>
>>Because I previously stated I resent Jaiden Smith's success
>>and I didn't start this post off hating on Kylie's success?
>
>
>
>Again, you stated that you resent HIM.
>"I resent this talentless product of Nepotism sooo much"

Listen I do generally resent average rich kids, black or white, being treated like they are geniuses.

If I came in this post praising Kylie's businessman acumen and brilliance, you might have an argument that I gave a white kid the benefit of the doubt I didn't give a black kid (but not exactly comprable though because the true equivalent really would be if Jaiden's shit was john blaze and I was dismissing it because of help from his family but whatever)

But that's not what me pointing out she is self-made is. As someone who always followed the list I know what Forbes meant, she didn't inherit her current wealth (900M) unlike say all the Waltons on the list. That's it.


>
>
>
>>I should start any discussion of any rich kid, no matter
>what
>>we are discussing, with stating I resent their success
>because
>>I once said that about a black kid otherwise I am expressing
>>self-hate?
>>
>>That's fucking Stupid bro.
>
>
>AGAIN, you said you resent HIM. You're not gonna make that go
>away.
>But stupid eh? This is exactly the same thing you do to me.
>NOW it's stupid when you're on the other end of it? These are
>the terms you set. I hope you're enjoying this banter you so
>fervently begged for.

I begged for this? Ok. What's funny is you think you did work here. LOL.

>
>
>
>>So your whole shit is because I once bad mouth this black
>rich
>>kid, if I don't say the same thing before discussing any
>rich
>>white kid I am displaying self-hate?
>
>
>Nah, my "whole shit" is that the request you made about Jaden
>would actually have been warranted in this post (can we start
>by acknowledging they wouldn't be who they are without_______
>). It wasn't warranted at all in the Jaden post, but I guess
>that was your "objective" resentment that made you say that
>about him lol. Total oxymoron.


Again, I never said my opinion of Jaiden was objective (I don't know why you keep harping on this made up point no one is making). The funny thing about that Jaiden post is I explained exactly where my opinion comes from which has a lot to do with dealing with rich white kids at my job and the work I do outside of my job helping underprivileged black and brown kids in their creative endeavours. My position stems out of the opposite of white praise and black self-hate.

You and Leggs seem to think it's some crime against black people to not love Jaiden Smith but I stand by everything I said in that post and this one.

Y'all want me to be that self-hating tom but yall fake deep ain't got anyone shook and I'll put my works in my community up against you or Legs any day of the week (unless you work in a school, cuz that shit is God's Work).

So again, keep trying.

>
>
>
>

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"