Well, a 100% accurate representation of what you assume goes on in places you aren't.

That aside - Imagine what could be gained by taking the greediest and showing them the only way to assuage that greed is by competing with other greedy and underhanded people over who can provide the best goods and services for everyone else.

Well, first off, what trillionaires? Musk was the first and only trillionaire, for a couple of days. Now he doesn't even have the $750 billion you want to seize.

We live in a dynamic world, not he static one you seem to see. Nobody stays on top forever. Fortunes are lost just as often as they are made. Maybe Musk will stay the richest person in the world until the day he dies, but that day will come and it won't change your life in the slightest.

It's clever though, right? Get your competitors to engage in an illegal activity and then stab them in the back by not participating.

You can't eliminate psychopathy, but if you can force them into competing with each other in a way that allows society to extract some general benefits from them, their evil can be turned into good.

And you don't see how that makes you look bad? Someone ran crying to a lawyer because they saw someone take a pie to the face. That is weak, pathetic, childish, and disgustingly greedy. I am proud that I am not associated with that, while you seem to me proud to have chosen to take the side of miserable inadequacy.

I can't help but notice that you're insulting me despite me never doing so to you. I've treated you like an adult despite your behavior. I criticize the complainant here for their far more childish behavior.

To me, you resorting to insults indicates that you know you're on the wrong side of the argument, so maybe I should just assume that and accept your concession. Sound good?

And now it's sexual harassment as well. Do you not see how stupid this is? A never-ending cycle of ever dumber claims.

That you can't see how ridiculous and pathetic this is baffles me. This guy is suing because he saw someone get hit with a creme pie. Just think about that for a minute.

Rationally, there must at least be an intent to cause physical harm. combined with potentially injurious physical contact Any divergence with legal application must be our fault for letting lawyers and crybabies stretch the definition past any reasonable limit. I must reject such an assertion as insane.

There can be no intent to cause physical harm with a cream pie, it's a thin, flaky crust holding a pile of whipped cream. I defy you to hurt someone with whipped cream. Or a flaky crust. You don't need to think about it very hard to see how the claim is both absurd and pathetic. At best, a dishonest cash-grab.

I hope not, I'm "only" 49.

Oh sh-t... I'm almost 50. Thanks a lot for reminding me of that.

The sales manager is a woman, and as I recall, Alec Baldwin was going to publicly fire the lowest performer, not make it a big, silly joke.

Clearly, the cinematic influence for this would come from The Three Stooges, not Mamet.

And yet nobody complained except the guy who didn't even last a month before quitting, and who never got hit with a pie. Apparently, the people who did get hit with pies took it in stride instead of running to a lawyer to try and get free money.

So, you know what? He clearly wasn't a good fit for the culture and should have quit (you conform to the workplace, not the other way around). It's the lawsuit that's pathetic and shows what kind of person he is.

Have you ever even seen a cream pie? A small pillow is more dangerous. You're basically getting a handful of whipped cream in the face. It CAN'T hurt. It doesn't stain. To make it hurt, you basically have to punch the person after hitting them with the pie.

You get a pie in the face, and then you laugh and then you go wipe it off. Also, it never even happened to the guy. He didn't work there for even one month, so he couldn't have been the previous month's lowest performer. Also note that nobody else thought it worth suing over. Maybe everyone else approached it with a healthy attitude?

You're verbally and emotionally abusing me and I'm going to sue.

That sound right to you? Or does that sound like I'm a little b-ch?

Note that this didn't even happen to the plaintiff. He saw someone get hit with a pie and ran away crying. It is pathetic.

Pies in the face have been a source of hilarity, not hostility, going back to at least the early 20th century. For over a hundred years it has been a sign of good-natured silliness.

And this guy is suing because he saw it happen (he was there less than a month)? I shudder to think what would happen if someone let him see The Three Stooges.

"the lowest-ranked sales consultant for the prior month"
"he was hired as a retail sales consultant on February 2, 2026"
"Figueroa resigned on February 27"

So, what the hell is he complaining about? That he saw someone get hit with a pie? And he wants money for that?

It's bad enough that he has the gall to call a pie in the face, "assault" and "violent", but it didn't even affect him!
Every time I look further into this, he comes off as even more pathetic. And our legal system doesn't exist to provide free money to people too pathetic to handle the real world. This should be laughed out of court, ideally with the Judge throwing pies at him and his shyster.