Multi-Billionaire Oprah Whines About Sexism & Income Inequality At DNC

[barbos]

Sure sure. Being white in South Africa plus wealthy gives one absolutely zero advantages. You know that as a kid, Elon literally walked around with emeralds in his pockets?

Donald Drumph clearly had advantage. Musk, not so much. Some luck but it was not money related.
Same as Bill Gates. By the way Bezos was dirt poor I think.

Musk’s parents were very well off. He definitely had a great deal of advantage because of his parents’ wealth.

Bezos’ origins were indeed relatively modest. He and his now ex-wife founded Amazon.

So Bezos and Oprah were poor. And Musk (SA) was rich. Are you saying US is a shitty country with lots of dirt poor people?

I’m saying that the US is a country where one can achieve a tremendous amount of financial success even if you were born in modest or even impoverished circumstances. It’s so good that Musk apparently thought it presented his best chance for financial success.

At the same time you can get tremendous (c) success when you come from rich piece of shit family such as Trump.
What is your point?
Do you understand that I don't really see much difference between Trump and Oprah when it comes business practices.
Both are scammers. it's just one of the scammer is on your team and other is not.

 

[Patooka]

@RVonse started this thread, not some Dem.

Understood. But she was then loudly defended on here. I do not get the appeal.
But I have noticed that before. Rich celebrities (athletes, musicians etc.) tend to be supported on the Left as much as those who became rich starting or developing businesses (Kochs, Musk, Bezos) get demonized. Beyonce good, Bezos bad. Lebron James good, Larry Ellison bad.

Why is Oprah Winfrey considered a "hard worker" but Elon Musk isn't? Is talking nonsense on TV really that hard a job?

Oprah is a wildly successful person who overcame the obstacles put in her way by being black and female. She expressed a strong message concerning other people who face the challenges she did.

I agree that she is "wildly successful". And I agree that she had obstacles. But she made her money peddling inanities. I do not see her as a role model for that reason.

Somehow, that got described as hypocrisy.
What's up with that?
Tom

A billionaire complaining about income inequality is indeed rich. With other billionaires, the standard Leftist line is that billionaires should not exist and that they would not exist if they paid their employees fairly. Why isn't Oprah eliminating income inequality in her media empire?

I'm absolutely shocked that you are playing Devil's Advocate against Oprah. That's so unlike you.

 

[Toni]

Sure sure. Being white in South Africa plus wealthy gives one absolutely zero advantages. You know that as a kid, Elon literally walked around with emeralds in his pockets?

Donald Drumph clearly had advantage. Musk, not so much. Some luck but it was not money related.
Same as Bill Gates. By the way Bezos was dirt poor I think.

Musk’s parents were very well off. He definitely had a great deal of advantage because of his parents’ wealth.

Bezos’ origins were indeed relatively modest. He and his now ex-wife founded Amazon.

So Bezos and Oprah were poor. And Musk (SA) was rich. Are you saying US is a shitty country with lots of dirt poor people?

I’m saying that the US is a country where one can achieve a tremendous amount of financial success even if you were born in modest or even impoverished circumstances. It’s so good that Musk apparently thought it presented his best chance for financial success.

At the same time you can get tremendous (c) success when you come from rich piece of shit family such as Trump.
What is your point?
Do you understand that I don't really see much difference between Trump and Oprah when it comes business practices.
Both are scammers. it's just one of the scammer is on your team and other is not.

I do realize that you do not understand. AFAIK, Oprah is not a scammer, pays her employees what she promises to pay, and actually attempts to do good for other people. Trump thinks only of himself, cheats everyone and attempted to overthrow our government. Oprah funds charities. Trump and his family ripped off a children's charity. One is worth billions of dollars. The other owes billions of dollars. Differences seem pretty stark to me. AFAIK you are unfamiliar with either Winfrey or Trump.

 

[RVonse]

A black woman from humble origins succeeding in white male supremacist patriarchal society and then pointing out that racism and wealth inequality are still big problems makes right-wing snowflakes and MAGGOTS froth at the mouth and lock and load their guns.

Using your logic we would have expected to see at least 1 or 2 female black billionaires (adjusted for inflation) that bootstrapped themselves in the US during the gilded age. After all according to you, there must have been poor female blacks overcoming every obstacle during that period growing up right next to Astor's and Rockefellers. So how come there weren't any black female magnets bootstrapping their way forward during the early 1800's? How do you explain that Pood?

Could it possibly be because there really was female and race discrimination back then that does not now exist? And that opportunities were actually limited by race and sex during that time that Oprah has proved no longer exists?!!

It should be also noted that Oprah wasn't the only rich US black female magnet at the DNC podium spouting race/sex discord and division. Obama was there too. At least 2 black female .1%ers who would like to see some poor MAGA whites from West Virginia pay them reparations so they can do further decorations on their palaces.

 

[Ford]

Well both Barack and Michelle Obama have charisma that could certainly be described as "magnetic," but...

 

[pood]

A black woman from humble origins succeeding in white male supremacist patriarchal society and then pointing out that racism and wealth inequality are still big problems makes right-wing snowflakes and MAGGOTS froth at the mouth and lock and load their guns.

Using your logic we would have expected to see at least 1 or 2 female black billionaires (adjusted for inflation) that bootstrapped themselves in the US during the gilded age. After all according to you, there must have been poor female blacks overcoming every obstacle during that period growing up right next to Astor's and Rockefellers. So how come there weren't any black female magnets bootstrapping their way forward during the early 1800's? How do you explain that Pood?

You’re kidding, right?

No, sadly, you’re not. And probably the “lesson” you will draw from the above link, if you even read it, was that there never was any discrimination at all against blacks or women!

 

[RVonse]

A black woman from humble origins succeeding in white male supremacist patriarchal society and then pointing out that racism and wealth inequality are still big problems makes right-wing snowflakes and MAGGOTS froth at the mouth and lock and load their guns.

Using your logic we would have expected to see at least 1 or 2 female black billionaires (adjusted for inflation) that bootstrapped themselves in the US during the gilded age. After all according to you, there must have been poor female blacks overcoming every obstacle during that period growing up right next to Astor's and Rockefellers. So how come there weren't any black female magnets bootstrapping their way forward during the early 1800's? How do you explain that Pood?

You’re kidding, right?

No, sadly, you’re not. And probably the “lesson” you will draw from the above link, if you even read it, was that there never was any discrimination at all against blacks or women!

No I wasn't kidding. And those black women you linked to were not .1%ers either. Upper middle class status maybe but not Rockefeller or Oprah wealthy. Furthermore, they were wealthy people living after the guilded age.

 

[laughing dog]

A black woman from humble origins succeeding in white male supremacist patriarchal society and then pointing out that racism and wealth inequality are still big problems makes right-wing snowflakes and MAGGOTS froth at the mouth and lock and load their guns.

Using your logic we would have expected to see at least 1 or 2 female black billionaires (adjusted for inflation) that bootstrapped themselves in the US during the gilded age. After all according to you, there must have been poor female blacks overcoming every obstacle during that period growing up right next to Astor's and Rockefellers. So how come there weren't any black female magnets bootstrapping their way forward during the early 1800's? How do you explain that Pood?

Could it possibly be because there really was female and race discrimination back then that does not now exist? And that opportunities were actually limited by race and sex during that time that Oprah has proved no longer exists?!!

It should be also noted that Oprah wasn't the only rich US black female magnet at the DNC podium spouting race/sex discord and division. Obama was there too. At least 2 black female .1%ers who would like to see some poor MAGA whites from West Virginia pay them reparations so they can do further decorations on their palaces.

Your response assumes that racist or sexist discrimination either exits or it doesn't. That is rather a dubious assumption. The effects of racism and sexism most likely run on a continuum. There is most likely much less racial discrimination against blacks or sexism against women now than in the early 1900s, but there is probably more than zero.

 

[pood]

A black woman from humble origins succeeding in white male supremacist patriarchal society and then pointing out that racism and wealth inequality are still big problems makes right-wing snowflakes and MAGGOTS froth at the mouth and lock and load their guns.

Using your logic we would have expected to see at least 1 or 2 female black billionaires (adjusted for inflation) that bootstrapped themselves in the US during the gilded age. After all according to you, there must have been poor female blacks overcoming every obstacle during that period growing up right next to Astor's and Rockefellers. So how come there weren't any black female magnets bootstrapping their way forward during the early 1800's? How do you explain that Pood?

You’re kidding, right?

No, sadly, you’re not. And probably the “lesson” you will draw from the above link, if you even read it, was that there never was any discrimination at all against blacks or women!

No I wasn't kidding. And those black women you linked to were not .1%ers either. Upper middle class status maybe but not Rockefeller or Oprah wealthy.

This is just idiotic. Those people were WEALTHY by 19th century standards — and, as perhaps someone like you would prefer NOT to know — there was a thriving community of WEALTHY blacks round about 1920 in Tulsa, Okla, called Black Wall Street, when the Trumpazees of the era got together and burned down all their homes and killed and injured a bunch of them. It was called the Tulsa Race Massacre, in case you would like to learn something for once. So, yes, despite HUGE white supremacist and misogynist roadblocks, SOME blacks and women were able to ahead financially even back to the Civil War era. Most did not, however, and even today there are huge income disparities between whites and blacks. You apparently know next to nothing about American history or American race relations.

Because yes, sadly, you really were not kidding. It’s embarrassing for you.

 

[ZiprHead]

One million dollars in 1890 was worth 34 million in today's dollars. A great deal more than upper middle class.

 

[bilby]

After all according to you, there must have been poor female blacks overcoming every obstacle during that period growing up right next to Astor's and Rockefellers. So how come there weren't any black female magnets bootstrapping their way forward during the early 1800's? How do you explain that Pood?

Are we both reading the same post?

Because I not only don't see Pood asserting any such mechanism (other than in subsequent replies to your misplaced scorn); I can't even see how to get from what Pood wrote, to what you describe as "according to you".

Even if I guess that by "magnets" you mean "magnates"*, The two appear to be distantly related at best.








* A magnet is a material or device that generates a strong magnetic field, and is attracted to ferrous materials; A magnate is the largest player in a given industry or enterprise, usually with monopoly or near monopoly dominance of the industry in question.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

After all according to you, there must have been poor female blacks overcoming every obstacle during that period growing up right next to Astor's and Rockefellers. So how come there weren't any black female magnets bootstrapping their way forward during the early 1800's? How do you explain that Pood?

Are we both reading the same post?

Because I not only don't see Pood asserting any such mechanism (other than in subsequent replies to your misplaced scorn); I can't even see how to get from what Pood wrote, to what you describe as "according to you".

Even if I guess that by "magnets" you mean "magnates"*, The two appear to be distantly related at best.








* A magnet is a material or device that generates a strong magnetic field, and is attracted to ferrous materials; A magnate is the largest player in a given industry or enterprise, usually with monopoly or near monopoly dominance of the industry in question.

He is arguing (poorly) that if Oprah managed it now and there is still racism/sexism, then rich black women should have existed in the early 20th Century as well because racism/sexism had similar barriers relative to the same ages.

Much like how disease doesn't exist today because the number of people that died from disease in the early 20th century were much higher.

 

[bilby]

After all according to you, there must have been poor female blacks overcoming every obstacle during that period growing up right next to Astor's and Rockefellers. So how come there weren't any black female magnets bootstrapping their way forward during the early 1800's? How do you explain that Pood?

Are we both reading the same post?

Because I not only don't see Pood asserting any such mechanism (other than in subsequent replies to your misplaced scorn); I can't even see how to get from what Pood wrote, to what you describe as "according to you".

Even if I guess that by "magnets" you mean "magnates"*, The two appear to be distantly related at best.








* A magnet is a material or device that generates a strong magnetic field, and is attracted to ferrous materials; A magnate is the largest player in a given industry or enterprise, usually with monopoly or near monopoly dominance of the industry in question.

He is arguing that if Oprah managed it now and there is still racism/sexism, then rich black women should have existed in the early 20th Century as well.

I know; But more worrying to me is that he is falsely attributing this argument to his interlocutor.

Much like how disease doesn't exist today because the number of people that died from disease in the early 20th century were much higher.

Oh, he's wildly wrong too. But that's not my primary concern.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

After all according to you, there must have been poor female blacks overcoming every obstacle during that period growing up right next to Astor's and Rockefellers. So how come there weren't any black female magnets bootstrapping their way forward during the early 1800's? How do you explain that Pood?

Are we both reading the same post?

Because I not only don't see Pood asserting any such mechanism (other than in subsequent replies to your misplaced scorn); I can't even see how to get from what Pood wrote, to what you describe as "according to you".

Even if I guess that by "magnets" you mean "magnates"*, The two appear to be distantly related at best.








* A magnet is a material or device that generates a strong magnetic field, and is attracted to ferrous materials; A magnate is the largest player in a given industry or enterprise, usually with monopoly or near monopoly dominance of the industry in question.

He is arguing that if Oprah managed it now and there is still racism/sexism, then rich black women should have existed in the early 20th Century as well.

I know; But more worrying to me is that he is falsely attributing this argument to his interlocutor.

Yeah, he is guilty of constructing a false dichotomy and placing pood's post one side and extrapolating it to the point of nonsense.

Much like how disease doesn't exist today because the number of people that died from disease in the early 20th century were much higher.

Oh, he's wildly wrong too. But that's not my primary concern.

Look, it rained 4 inches three months ago. I don't care what you say, it couldn't have possibly rained today.

 

[Shadowy Man]

You’re kidding, right?

Robert Reed Church, born a slave June 18, 1839, in Holly Springs, Miss., was one of the first Black millionaires in the South and the founder of Solvent Savings Bank, the first Black-owned bank in the city of Memphis, where he amassed his fortune. Church was the largest landowner in the state of Tennessee Black or White.

Clearly this guy, who became a millionaire in mid/late 1800s, couldn’t have suffered from racism.

Except maybe the being born a slave part. After that though it must have been smooth sailing. He had more land in Tennessee than even any white people!!

 

[Ford]

You’re kidding, right?

Robert Reed Church, born a slave June 18, 1839, in Holly Springs, Miss., was one of the first Black millionaires in the South and the founder of Solvent Savings Bank, the first Black-owned bank in the city of Memphis, where he amassed his fortune. Church was the largest landowner in the state of Tennessee Black or White.

Clearly this guy, who became a millionaire in mid/late 1800s, couldn’t have suffered from racism.

Except maybe the being born a slave part. After that though it must have been smooth sailing. He had more land in Tennessee than even any white people!!

Well according to some folks in Florida, that "being born a slave part" was actually a great thing! He learned important skills! It was really just a jobs training program! Yeah, sure, there was some whipping going on, but mostly slavery was educational!

(Seriously, there are people who have actually said this sort of thing)

 

[Shadowy Man]

You’re kidding, right?

Robert Reed Church, born a slave June 18, 1839, in Holly Springs, Miss., was one of the first Black millionaires in the South and the founder of Solvent Savings Bank, the first Black-owned bank in the city of Memphis, where he amassed his fortune. Church was the largest landowner in the state of Tennessee Black or White.

Clearly this guy, who became a millionaire in mid/late 1800s, couldn’t have suffered from racism.

Except maybe the being born a slave part. After that though it must have been smooth sailing. He had more land in Tennessee than even any white people!!

Well according to some folks in Florida, that "being born a slave part" was actually a great thing! He learned important skills! It was really just a jobs training program! Yeah, sure, there was some whipping going on, but mostly slavery was educational!

(Seriously, there are people who have actually said this sort of thing)

Doesn’t sound any worse than an unpaid internship on Wall Street. And look what it got him. A life of luxury devoid of racism!

 

[barbos]

Sure sure. Being white in South Africa plus wealthy gives one absolutely zero advantages. You know that as a kid, Elon literally walked around with emeralds in his pockets?

Donald Drumph clearly had advantage. Musk, not so much. Some luck but it was not money related.
Same as Bill Gates. By the way Bezos was dirt poor I think.

Musk’s parents were very well off. He definitely had a great deal of advantage because of his parents’ wealth.

Bezos’ origins were indeed relatively modest. He and his now ex-wife founded Amazon.

So Bezos and Oprah were poor. And Musk (SA) was rich. Are you saying US is a shitty country with lots of dirt poor people?

I’m saying that the US is a country where one can achieve a tremendous amount of financial success even if you were born in modest or even impoverished circumstances. It’s so good that Musk apparently thought it presented his best chance for financial success.

At the same time you can get tremendous (c) success when you come from rich piece of shit family such as Trump.
What is your point?
Do you understand that I don't really see much difference between Trump and Oprah when it comes business practices.
Both are scammers. it's just one of the scammer is on your team and other is not.

I do realize that you do not understand. AFAIK, Oprah is not a scammer, pays her employees what she promises to pay, and actually attempts to do good for other people. Trump thinks only of himself, cheats everyone and attempted to overthrow our government. Oprah funds charities. Trump and his family ripped off a children's charity. One is worth billions of dollars. The other owes billions of dollars. Differences seem pretty stark to me. AFAIK you are unfamiliar with either Winfrey or Trump.

Scamming usually involves scamming clients, not employees.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

At the same time you can get tremendous (c) success when you come from rich piece of shit family such as Trump.
What is your point?
Do you understand that I don't really see much difference between Trump and Oprah when it comes business practices.
Both are scammers. it's just one of the scammer is on your team and other is not.

I do realize that you do not understand. AFAIK, Oprah is not a scammer, pays her employees what she promises to pay, and actually attempts to do good for other people. Trump thinks only of himself, cheats everyone and attempted to overthrow our government. Oprah funds charities. Trump and his family ripped off a children's charity. One is worth billions of dollars. The other owes billions of dollars. Differences seem pretty stark to me. AFAIK you are unfamiliar with either Winfrey or Trump.

Scamming usually involves scamming clients, not employees.

Oprah, starting from little, sold a popular shit product and became successful and eventually shifted her product into quality. Made even more money.

Trump, who started with wealth, was shit at business. Lost a fortune in casinos that required an immoral stock maneuver to save his ass. He has failed in about every business he tried to run, because he sucks at running businesses. He swapped over to simply marketing his name as meaning wealth and value. Made some money there. He is worth a lot less now than he'd been worth if he put his inheritance in an S&P tracking fund. This is ignoring his charity and school scams.

These two people share very little in common.

 

[barbos]

shifted her product into quality

I must have missed that moment. And "her" what is that? She started designing and manufacturing shit?