These fucks
I’m sure the timing is very coincidental and has nothing to do with the recent AFD win
People like this will happily burn the world so that they can rule over the ashes
He said the same thing a month ago: https://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/unternehmer-nicolas-stihl-35-stunden-woche-nicht-mehr-zeitgemaess-a-a69431e3-905a-4c8a-ba45-abdaa6dfceff
But I don’t get it. Wealth doesn’t really increase by working more. For skilled jobs, working longer means you are producing the same output in more time and feel worse. If you want to increase production, you need to invest in research and technology.
Hundreds of years ago, one farmer could feed a hand full of people, today it’s probably thousands, thanks to modern technology. If the farmers back then would work twice as much, they could still only feed a hand full of people, but they would probably die a lot sooner.
I imagine the same thing which finished off heavy industry in the U.K. is hurting DE a lot also, high energy prices.
Less of a direct effect on assembly businesses, but for heavy production where your process is largely to convert energy to product its devestating. Then you lose those job while also having to pay another county for the product. It fucked us over here for sure
Yeah, that’s the fairy tale they try to tell us because it sounds logical if you don’t look closer.
In reality those high energy prices are just a narrative (at least for Germany). Heavy industry pays average amounts in European comparison. It’s the private end consumer who’s getting poor from all the taxes and fees to subsidize cheap energy for the industry. Those are the same people whose real wages increased by ~25% in the last few decades while their real economic output in the same time frame increased by ~250%. And all that money is funneled off to a few ultra rich while pensions, social benefits and health care are linked to the stagnating wages.
The actual problem of Germany’s economy is that they systematically fucked over Germans for decades to optimise their trade output. So now when global demand is shifting there is no domestic demand to compensate because they are all fucking poor (compare: average wealth with median wealth) and squeezed by constantly increasing costs that in many cases just increase the profit margins of the very same companies they already subsidize with their taxes.
Added some charts for comparison (data from 2024-2025):
What fairy tale? I was making an assumption based on watching the industry die in the UK for the reasons backed up by your graph.
Looks like Germany is different from what I assumed
The fairy tale German politicians and the media tell 24/7 of how high energy costs for the industry and much too high wages are the problem. And this is after all about a German CEO calling for lower wages “to safeguard Germany’s prosperity and welfare state”.
When in reality Germany, so the other 99,999999% but him, are struggling because of low wages that in no way represent their economic output, high and rising energy costs –exactly so the industry gets lower costs– and with the pension, social and health system not looking sustainable, but again not because of the delusions this guy and his other rich friends are spreading, but because they are linked to stagnating wages. Suggesting more less and lower pay so his profit margins go up and the country is more fucked is simply insane… or just shameless. Yeah, probably the latter.
Wasn’t meant personally in any way. As I said, it sounds logical without a closer look. So I told how it looks from the inside.
“an overregulated economy, high energy costs, high labour costs, high taxes and a declining level of education and qualifications.”
Yeah. Because self-regulation and no taxes certainly worked for, for example, America’s skills and education level.
They STIHL think that more hours lead to more productivity. All I know is no pay leads to finding alternative pay.
Kill capitalists. Save the planet. Simple.
“If we just kill all the people we don’t like, the world will surely be a better place” - All the most evil people in history
Not liking has nothing to do with it. It’s verified evidence that these people don’t see others as humans, they see us as product. Not even counting the massive human rights violations. These type of people are the ones we should be chanting murder to, because they Choose to do this.
You would have to be an actual lobotomite to think that killing all the billionaires is going to change anything. All the people under them would just take their place? Are you just going to keep killing people endlessly, what’s exactly is that 200 iq play here?
If they surrender and face justice, then they get to “live.” and those under them also get to “live” but in prisons, for the rest of thier days. No more freedoms for those who knowingly work with and orchestrate human rights violators. Any resistance by fascists and thier funders to justice should be met with deadly force.
The rules are simple, don’t be a fascist.
Under your logic, killing the hyper evil nazis of 1940 should have made no difference and nazi Germany would still… looks at recent adf win in Germany OK, but at least we got some time without them.
Point being that facisim is evil and it must be stopped by any means necessary.
The point that I made completely flew over your head. I didn’t ask you what you thought the appropriate punishment should be, I specifically criticized the notion that you think that the world’s problems can be solved by a quick fix, which in this case is getting rid of the billionaires.
It doesn’t take a genius to figure out why this shallow line of thought is flawed. It oversimplifies all the world problems to a single source, which is never the case, and it tries to sell a one time silver bullet solution that promises to immediately fix a lot of the world’s problems quickly, which also never happens. For all your talk about Nazis, this mentality is ironically one of the biggest drivers of evil ideologies in history. All the most bloodthirsty dictators have the same idea of “if we just get rid of all the people we don’t like, the world will surely be a better place”. They all think that history will look kindly on them for doing what they’re doing, but that’s never the case.
Take Mao as an example. He did exactly what you want down to the letter, and the result was the worst man made catastrophe in recorded history. He is responsible for the single highest death toll of any state leader ever, and he is globally recognized as a monster. All of that, and his original goal of getting rid of social classes failed. Despite all the killings and deaths, it changed nothing. China has the highest number of billionaires in the world.
Do you know why Mao failed and why your wish here will fail in the same exact way? It’s because it’s not based on grounded reality. Billionaires just represent a tip of an iceberg. They’re just the top of the economic hierarchy. If you kill them all, they will be immediately replaced by the people right under them, and if you kill those, they will be replaced the people under them, and so on and so forth. In a hierarchal system, vacant positions at the top will always be filled by the next in line. So what is your master plan? To keep killing people until there is no one left? What death toll is good enough to satisfy you?
The next thought for people with beliefs like this is they think that if they can’t solve problems by killing people then they’ll just destroy the system that enables the current hierarchies… but that’s also stupid because you’ll just replace them with a different set of hierarchies. Take a look at the Soviet Union. They tried to get rid of the capitalist hierarchies based on economic wealth by having the state seize and redistribute private wealth. While they got rid of their economic classes, they introduced new political classes that took over as the new elite. The power and wealth that was with the tycoons transferred over to government and party elites. It’s the same problem just reskinned, that’s actually why the USSR collapsed.
This is because you can’t actually get rid of hierarchies. Inequality is literally one of the definition hallmarks of civilization. We are social animals, and all social animals are hierarchal. That’s how we organize ourselves and our societies. It’s a part of our DNA, so trying to get rid of it is a battle lost before it started. That’s why any serious ideology needs to factor this in order to be pass the bare minimum of being considered pragmatic.
As it turns out, history has shown how we can fix the issues we’re seeing today. The reason why Germany, Italy, and Japan were able to rebuild and move past their fascist chapters is because they were forced to rebuild their system from the ground up based on liberal values, not by killing all the Nazis… that’s just historical illiteracy. Things like secularism, democracy, freedom of speech, rule of law, equality of opportunity, and most importantly, check and balances is what transformed those societies into the advanced and open nations that they are today.
In America’s case, that’s what’s missing. There is no accountability at any level. The checks and balances that used to be there aren’t being applied anymore. The branches of government aren’t keeping each other in check, the constitution isn’t being respected, the economy isn’t being regulated, the people are largely apathetic to the abuses of power, laws aren’t applied universally, and opportunity is not given equally. The lack of accountability erodes trust in the country and its institutions, which just fuels more distrust creating a vicious cycle. This isn’t an issue that can be solved overnight by killing people or destroying things. It’s a multifaceted issue that requires education, great coordination efforts, and a politically active public… which unfortunately a lot of people don’t find sexy enough of a problem or solution to do something about it and so we’re stuck with ideas like yours for the time being.
Ah I see, you were looking to the long term. I see your points. However, killing them is the accountability and we’ll keep doing so untill they accept jail instead. It is the punishment for what they have done. I’m willing to settle for jail. But I don’t know about the rest of the world. Because remember they are killing us because it hurt thier bottom line and we’re undesirable. They are choosing to be evil. There is no good justification for thier actions. I won’t fight you on the needing new systems part. But I will fight you on the hierarchy bs. It may be “nature” but, we do things that go against nature all the time to benifit others. Vaccination, antibiotics, gmos, and other similar items. Going down that nature argument is a slippery slope that leads directly into thinking that others are lesser, the lie that you and the right belive. I don’t see billionaires as lesser, I see them as a threat to all that we hold dear and because they are not lesser or greater, they can be stopped. We are all squishy and a quasar could have said fuck you 1000’s of years ago and a cosmic death ray could kill us all any moment. However, the billionaire threat is something we can do something about. We can’t kill a quasar, but we can kill monsters that seek to kill innocent humans on the basis of superiority and race.
“What death toll is good enough to satisfy you?” the number of deaths to that provides a deteriant to prevent any one from having that much power again. And that number, will be surprisingly low. Mark my words. Especially if we kill them in ways that they beg for death and make them stay alive through every ounce of pain they have caused. Like shoving them through the Jaunt… awake.
You will be useful in the end, you will be one of the few that will be a guardian of the innocent. You will be the one who defends Trump voters to make sure that those rightfully and deeply angry victims of the rich’s crimes against humanity don’t attack the foolish and brainwashed. Good on you. Keep it up.
My wrath is only interested in those who chose to do evil and have been verified to not have the long term health of humanity in mind. You are right that more rich people will replace them, but, if those rich that replace are not evil and do things that truly benifit humanity and are looser with thier wallets and willing to be accountable, then maybe, just maybe we can have a better world. Untill then, death to evil rich and thier loyal servants.
We want the same thing, the end to evil and a happy life for all. And using history as a lense, the system changes came about only after a large number of deaths. Im proposing to limit death to those who are rich, racist, and currently hold the reigns of power for evil. Simple as that.
However, killing them is the accountability and we’ll keep doing so untill they accept jail instead. It is the punishment for what they have done. I’m willing to settle for jail. But I don’t know about the rest of the world. Because remember they are killing us because it hurt thier bottom line and we’re undesirable.
I think you’re missing the point here. The difference between tyranny and justice is the means of delivering accountability. I’m in favor of the rich and powerful facing justice, however, it has to be done in an extremely principled way. We have to give to hold them accountable for breaking laws that apply to everyone else, and those laws have to be based on universally applicable principles. Not only that, but they need to be given fair trials and appropriate punishments.
In simpler words, you can’t punish billionaires on misguided emotions, justice has to be just at every level. For example, you can’t just grab a random billionaire and execute them for being a billionaire. Why? Because we would be condemning a person for what is essentially a lawful act. If we were to do that then the law would lose meaning and we would create a slippery slope to tyranny. Therefore, you have to punish the specific billionaires for specific acts that violated the law. Just like anybody else they have to go through trial, they’ll have the right to a defense, and the court shall judge them appropriately based on the evidence provided by the prosecution. If they are deemed guilty then they have to punished within the confines of the law.
Again, it sounds boring and unsexy compared to movie styled executions, but these technicalities matter a lot as they are the very foundations of society. If they are not taken seriously, then you’ll be creating a fragile society that’s prone to collapse because it stands on nothing.
But I will fight you on the hierarchy bs. It may be “nature” but, we do things that go against nature all the time to benifit others. Vaccination, antibiotics, gmos, and other similar items. Going down that nature argument is a slippery slope that leads directly into thinking that others are lesser, the lie that you and the right belive.
You have fundamental misunderstanding of what hierarchies are. They are NOT optional. They are our innate biological mechanism that allows us to socialize in large groups. In order to have a functional society, you need to have large groups of people to specialize in different thing and coordinate to deliver common goals. Hierarchies do this by breaking up complex tasks into smaller chunks via labor division, streamlining abstract processes like coordination efforts and decision making, and by providing a clear social structure like a chain of command. Societal organization like this require leadership on multiple levels. Leadership positions by definition are a supreme as they have special privileges that grant them more power than the positions below them.
However, this type of supremacy has nothing to do with the supremacy that you’re talking about. Position based supremacy is completely different from the idea of inherent supremacy. For example, take a country like France. The president has the most supreme governmental power of any individual in the country. That person stands at the top of the political hierarchy. However, they are not superior or inferior to anybody else. They’re just a normal citizen that’s equal to all others who was voted in by society to serve as a leader by holding this position for a period of time. An individual being the president of France does not make them superior or inferior to other French people. The idea of inherent supremacy, aka, where people think they’re born superior to others, is the problem, but that’s a very specific type of supremacy that is demonstrably false.
Ideologies like anarchy have a completely misinformed understanding of what hierarchies are, and thus they treat all hierarchies as evil because they think they’re the source of inherent supremacy because they have positional supremacy based on vertical social organization. That’s just a flawed understanding of many different topics.
“What death toll is good enough to satisfy you?” the number of deaths to that provides a deteriant to prevent any one from having that much power again. And that number, will be surprisingly low. Mark my words. Especially if we kill them in ways that they beg for death and make them stay alive through every ounce of pain they have caused.
That’s just… unhinged. History has shown that cruelty is one of the weakest long term deterrents because resentment and desperation are much stronger drivers in humans than fear. Cruelty is tyranny, and tyranny never stops where it was originally intended. The goalposts will always move and there will always be new targets, pushing the populace in to a corner where they will eventually lash out and destroy it.
If you think that the violence would stop at the billionaires then you’re greatly mistaken. It will quickly expand to include critics of these policies, multimillionaires, people who propped up billionaires (lawyers, doctors, politicians, etc), and so on eventually expanding all the way out to the common people where a new reign of terror will take place.
Again, what you’re saying here has already happened in recent history, more than once to. I’ll once again, bring up Mao as an example. He killed every capitalist, every businessman, every lawyer, every intellectual, every critic, he killed so many people that his reign of terror has become the standard example of democide… and has it worked? Nope, the cruelty he employed was supposed to be a strong deterrent, but China literally readopting capitalism shortly after he died because his economic policies almost brought the country to collapse again.
You will be useful in the end, you will be one of the few that will be a guardian of the innocent.
Is it not concerning for you that you don’t view yourself as such?
You are right that more rich people will replace them, but, if those rich that replace are not evil and do things that truly benifit humanity and are looser with thier wallets and willing to be accountable, then maybe, just maybe we can have a better world. Untill then, death to evil rich and thier loyal servants.
The issue here is that evil is an inherently subjective term. It’s not something that can be quantified or measured. In other words, your entire view here is not based on something that’s grounded in reality. The idea of inherent evil has the same exact problems as the idea of inherent supremacy. They both make the assumption that there are people that fundamentally different from others, which is not true. We’re all the same regardless of wealth, status, or race. If all people are the same then that means your conclusion has to be false, and something else is at play… which is in fact the case. The issues with our current society is entirely systematic, not individualistic. Things are what they are because of flaws in the systems we use to structure our society. That’s something that has to be fixed by legislation based on data and reasoning, not violence.
And using history as a lense, the system changes came about only after a large number of deaths.
This is not true. History is full of peaceful power transitions, system reforms, and revolutions.
Im proposing to limit death to those who are rich, racist, and currently hold the reigns of power for evil. Simple as that.
But this is literally the mentality of the most evil people in history. Like I said before, all the most evil people have the mentality that the world would be a better place if they just killed the people they didn’t like. They all thought that they’ll restrain themselves to only what’s necessary and that history would look kindly on them once they see the results. However, that’s never the case, for a reason.
The family entrepreneur from Waiblingen in southern Germany does not mince his words…
Family businessman Stihl takes a long-term view…
STIHL: €5.48bn in revenue and more than 20,000 employees
Just a small FAMILY businessman… The stilted way these pieces always try to humanize the people calling for more worker exploitation always creeps me out. Do they think the workers don’t have families or something?
Financial obesity is neurotoxic, an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.
Corporations are the only ‘persons’ which should be subjected to capital punishment, but trillionaires should be forced to transition into billionaires, and billionaires should be euthanised through taxation.
Euthanized by taxation can’t work. Even if you pull it off, the wealth simply leaves and reinvests in a less restrictive country. Capital flight. Race to the bottom.
Overcoming capital would mean the victims of capitalism—all of us—coordinating on the scale at which capital operates: the global scale. We can’t even agree at national scales.
Worse, capital owns the communications infrastructure and controls which messages get amplified and which dampened. They can actively manipulate our “common knowledge”, our sense of what everyone else takes for granted. They can, and do maneuver us into two mutually antagonistic factions, each convinced of their moral righteousness, their justified hatred of the other half of the population.
To actually defeat capital and institute a better, stable, fair system, we’d need to first reconcile with the arbitrary political faction we’ve been trained to hate. Then we’d have a shot at globally coordinating in a world where the five richest men in earth own media networks.
It’s a hard problem.
I am entirely convinced that if every billionaire drops dead today, there will be peace on earth tomorrow.
Ehhh, no. The millionaires right below them will erupt in a frenzy to take the top spot and assert control of as much as they can.
Say what you will, but those most vicious ones at the top spend a lot of energy keeping the ones who are just below them, in their places. I see that a ton of misery would spring loose as the multi-millionaires fight each other to get to the top.
This is such a shallow view of the world. No, if every single billionaire died tomorrow, literally nothing will change. The people below them will rise to the top. People who think like you also think that if they got rid of the hierarchy, then surely the problem will be solved… But no, when one hierarchy is gone another will take its place. This is because humans are social animals, and like all the other great apes, we evolved to exist in hierarchal societies.
Blaming evolution for your inability to see past hierarchy is a pretty silly position.
If that’s what you got from what I said then your reading comprehension levels are non existent.
Cynic here. I love the sentiment, but without an effective societal rule change the battle for their wealth would be insane. Does each new billionaire drop dead too? That could work out….
