441–450 of 565 posts
Feels like those metrics would cut to the quick much better than soft pro con feelings.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes me uncomfortable is the elitism running through many of his videos. Put 100 "poors" in a circle so they can fight it out for $500k [1]? It's just another rich person making poor people do demeaning things for his entertainment and profit. It's disgusting. 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxYjTTXc-J8
They explicitly call this out in the article, but, how is what he’s doing any different than what we always were told reality TV was doing or gameshows do? This is worlds better than casinos, sports betting, or any other form of gambling, IMO. People are entertained through watching or participating and some are making big dollars. My kids watch his videos because the algorithm feeds it to them and from what I’ve see…
My kids love Mr Beast. I'm uncomfortable with it and can't put my finger on it. It feels like he makes life look like you stand a good chance of having someone walk in and give you $100,000. Maybe there is no harm in thinking that? But it feels like the same thing as buying a lottery ticket. I guess YouTube is free? But is the time spent on that channel worth it over doing other things? I admire the approach he takes…
1) His way of giving away things for free undermines the suffering people go trough to make a living; it makes effort and hardship look like a joke (maybe in the future no effort is required, and we are reminded about this possibility here, and it's sad); 2) It promotes consumerisms: getting stuff (phones, cars) is supposed to liberate us, and doing it in this way reveals how empty it all is; 3) It feels rarely perso…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Licensing deals aren’t the same as starting a burger business. Clearly the partnering institutions aren’t living up to par but he’s just licensing and marketing which is a pretty common arrangement for these sorts of things. Not sure I agree it’s shady, egregious maybe.
Certainly not shady. Many brands put their label on crap merchandise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Are "poors" too stupid to make decisions for themselves? Everyone in that video received thousands of dollars. I'm nowhere near poor, but if I was given an opportunity, I'd probably participate. No one's saying they're stupid for participating. If I was offered thousands of dollars for peeing in my pants in public for a video, I'd very probably take the offer and no one would think I was stupid for it; it would sti…
Why do you get to be the arbiter of what's demeaning? Are "poors" too stupid to determine their own limits? Playing silly games is hardly comparable to peeing your pants in public.
If they'd all get their equal share of money and could compete out of their own volition and quit anytime they'd want then this would be morally ok. But then nobody would watch it. And that there's exactly why this whole thing is morally wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But this doesn't strike me as being done out of any noble purpose Money given away doesn't have to have a "noble purpose", the act is good in itself. The people receiving it don't care about motive, I don't care about motive, and the only reason you care about motive is because you're threatened by another person doing good. There's no virtue inherent to giving anonymously. A piece of food or a warm house don't car…
> I don't care about motive Pablo Escobar gave free money away. Would you take the money? He also built schools. Motive matters. His intents were to build loyalty masked as charity. MrBeast is building (or has built) something else, masked as charity. I hope MrBeast never stop giving away money and curing people, but there are some considerations to make here, and not just taking as granted the reasons the very same…
If Mr. Beast steals money to donate it I'd be against it regardless of motive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think so, yes. It'd be even better if he just gave the money, no strings attached.
But then he'd have no money to give away. I don't see how it's this difficult to understand. Either you have Mr Beast as we do now - curing blindness and deafness, giving people houses and cars, raising millions for tangible, proven reforestation and sea cleanup efforts - or we don't have Mr Beast at all. I also find his videos uncomfortable to watch for many of the same reasons stated here, but I don't find them har…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eye laser surgery? (LASIK, PRK, etc.) I thought the discussion here was about cataract surgery. Australia has "free if you're poor and can wait" o/wise relatively cheap depending on your private health insurance. https://www.finder.com.au/cataract-surgery-costs Working vision correction to avoid glasses | contacts is purely elective in .au https://www.finder.com.au/laser-eye-surgery
Sorry I meant cataract surgery. I just happen to be discussing eye laser surgery with a friend considering it. Seems misleading for that site to say it’s free. There’s small fees which you end up paying that Medicare doesn’t cover. And afaik you require a referral for public hospital which is not covered.
I'd wager that small referral fees in Australia amount to considerably less than surgery costs in countries with no socialised health care systems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me, the discomfort is that Mr Beast's content relies on exploiting people's desperation due to the lack of social safety net. It's not his fault that they're in such dire straits to begin with, but he's nonetheless behaving opportunistically and his actions have no chance of changing the system that landed these people in such tough situations
He’s making these peoples lives better though. How would him not doing this stuff help anyone? Just because he’s not overthrowing the system the happiness he’s provided is worthless?
one time payments need to be used strategically, and we know from lottery winners that many don't know how to do that.
if we want to help people we need to work on changing systems that allow them to raise their income or lower their monthly expenses or carefully guide them to use one time payments to fix a problem in their life that will have a long term benefit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm also uncomfortable with it. There's nothing inherently wrong with philanthropy but what I'm seeing is a very successful business with an enormous and very expensive campus. MrBeast himself is very rich. So what I'm seeing is a corporation claiming to do everything for the benefit of others while actually taking a lot of the money very visibly for themselves. His channel made $54m from youtube in 2021, and probabl…
His channel made $54m from youtube in 2021, and probably a lot more from corporate sponsors. Make no mistake, this is big business - not charity. that is is? that is a rounding error for almost any decent-sized tech company. We're talking a household name, and one of the most popular channels ever, which is on the front page of youtube by default. I would have thought it would be more. yes, he made $54 million, but s…