• LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Any reason to prefer capturing trust fund guardians rather than killing them? I mean, the base plan doesn’t call for checking how the original billionaire got their money or assessing them personally. We’re operating strictly at meme level - controlling enormous wealth is evil. “Kill them! Kill them all!” Anybody who decides to wuss out and start adding constraints could be a shill or an apologist - at any rate it doesn’t show full commitment to Sparkle Motion.

    • FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Ironically, moreso for legal reasons than anything else. If Jeeves becomes the sole guardian of the kids’ inheritance, offing him means you lose the passwords to the offshore accounts and control of the trust goes to some extended family member or the bank itself. If he can be coerced or turned, you’ve a much easier route to accessing the funds, buying the company that makes school lunches and telling them to knock it the fuck off charging children for food.

      We don’t need to kill them all, just enough to make the rest realize that “number go up” doesn’t mean much when you see a torch and pitchfork every time you look out a window.

      E) This is assuming all banks and lawyers follow legal procedure, which may go out the window along with the first publicly defenestrated billionaire so…I’m not sure how we go about getting all the digital bank notes but I’m just a grunt who exits the plane early, that’s a question for someone smarter