YES
Finally some sort of actual consequence for the malicious bullshit of the ultra wealthy. We take those Ws
They’re never going to spend a second in jail. The swiss don’t have them in custody now and they probably never will. The rich only ever get punished if they harm other richer people.
They got suspended sentences. The author of the article didn't do their research (probably an LLM anyway).
I was thinking it would be something like that and was shocked when it wasn’t mentioned in the article. But it doesn’t matter. Switzerland was never going to get them. They didn’t show up to their court cases and were claiming that they weren’t a flight risk. If Switzerland asked for their extradition from Monaco I bet you a year of my salary that they would have conveniently left just before the extradition request goes through. What a coincidence.
Too bad it's only one instance. They can never stop the majority of these assholes, just pick away at the occasional examples in a futile effort to scare the rest of them and to behaving.
Imagine being worth almost $50 billion and paying your staff basically slave wages.
That's why they're worth that much. You can't hoard that much wealth and have empathy. They're mutually exclusive.
They sound like animals. Glad to see justice being done here.
How's do you think they got to be worth that much in the first place
Don't have to imagine it. That's most companies too.
Sounds like the Saudi royal family. Except they're not that poor.
Good start. They are actually not the only ones in that area where rumors of similar treatment of employees are making the rounds.
I wonder if working conditions have improved recently after this. LOL.
Could be, if the neighbours did smart up.
Rich family exploits their workers.. suprise, suprise. I wonder just how many others they've exploited.
Nasty scummy people who should be in prison.
Britain's richest family has got to be the royals, right? Some wacky paperwork might make it look like it's not that way, but i have to assume that that's the case unless an in depth investigation specifically proves that it ISN'T true.
Why? The worlds richest people aren't royal, so why would the UKs richest person need to be?
The British monarchy does have a relatively unique position in having been atop one of the world's biggest economies for far longer uninterrupted than any other extant royal family. You'd expect them to have amassed more than other royals solely because they've had access to far more opportunities to do so. That doesn't necessarily mean that they'll have outpaced every other rich family in the UK, but I can see where the person above is coming from
I can see where they're coming from, sure. But assuming something with no proof doesn't make any sense, to me at least.
I just found it such an odd thing to make an assumption over.
Afaik rishi sunaks family is way richer than the royal family. You live in capitalism, not feudalism
They’re the same picture.
Capitalism == neofeudalism
Just like
Paycheck-To-Paycheck == neoslavery
The royals have actual huge tracts of tax free land though. That's why capitalists want their own fiefs.
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/