As Twitchy told you earlier, Mackenzie Bezos has pledged to donate half of her nearly $37 billion fortune to charity. That’s over $18 billion. Sounds pretty generous, right? Not to Peter Daou, it doesn’t:
Giving half your money to charity and still keeping EIGHTEEN BILLION DOLLARS is what's wrong with this system.
NO HUMAN NEEDS A BILLION DOLLARS.
A wealth cap of $100 million is more than fair.#ExtremeInequality = Injustice
— Peter Daou (@peterdaou) May 28, 2019
#JeffBezos could solve world hunger and end homelessness and still have BILLIONS left over. How is that acceptable??https://t.co/Mysm1B7wuj
— Peter Daou (@peterdaou) May 28, 2019
Amazing how rightwingers jump up and down when I suggest a wealth cap of $100 MILLION.
'Who are you to control how much money a person should have?" they scream.
But not a WORD about laws that control women and tell them what they can do INSIDE their bodies.
Hypocrites. https://t.co/A1jm1DDwUi
— Peter Daou (@peterdaou) May 28, 2019
Who’s being hypocritical, Peter? Progressives love to wax poetic about how they’re the ones looking out for the little guy, yet here you are railing against a woman who wants to give billions of dollars to charity while you do nothing but pitch a fit?
— [::::] (@wickedpoptart) May 28, 2019
You want to be a billionaire, invent the next Amazon, you jealous little slimeball. https://t.co/XOOU2AOr04
— Amy Curtis (@RantyAmyCurtis) May 28, 2019
How about you go yell at the Clintons and their foundation. https://t.co/wzAsAP8KQR
— Heather (@hboulware) May 28, 2019
"No human needs a billion dollars"? No human "needs" a twitter account, but he still has one. What a putz.
— Farmer Ted (@commish_rwrffl) May 28, 2019
