Lion kills businessman at luxury safari lodge in Namibia after he stepped out of tent to use toilet
Lion kills businessman at luxury safari lodge in Namibia after he stepped out of tent to use toilet
The victim was camping with other tourists at the tented resort when the early morning tragedy unfolded, police said.
You're viewing a single thread.
Sounds like this person wasn't a trophy-hunting motherfucker like Donald Jr. or Eric or the fat fuck from Jimmy Johns. (And therefore, in my book, a genuine tragedy.)
Still, when nature can't feed itself (and the article states food is depleted due to drought) animals can and will attack humans. This was the risk he took.
He's still going to get hate here for being wealthy, which necessarily means he's not paying workers the true value of their labor.
I mean, do you HAVE to be wealthy to do a safari camp out thing?
Looks like the nice spots (not in a tent) are around N$ 4,030.
https://www.xe.com/currencyconverter/convert/?Amount=4030&From=NAD&To=USD
$225. US.
So I could stay at a Namibian resort for 8 days for $2,000. That's not like Bezos money or anything. The airfare would likely cost more.
Not at all. Especially in Namibia.
Edit: if there wasn't an en suite bathroom attached to the tent, its not fancy. En suite tents are absolutely a thing.
Source: lived in southern Africa for a while, did a lot of sketchy car camping that included many, many opportunities to be killed on the way to the toilet at 2:00am.
It can get expensive obviously, but you can also do it for a reasonable cost. Like almost any other holiday to a foreign country.
Some luxury camps are well over $1000US a night even in the offseason. But there are also many to choose from that aren’t nearly that much. If moving around, you could fly between camps, but you can also drive. It’s up to you. There are many youtube videos about it.
And as you’ve stated, the airfare itself is something to contend with if traveling to the other side of the planet.
Being able to take a week off work is bourgeoisie, probably
Big jump to conclusions here.
Can the guy not run an honest business make money? It looks like he started a business in Namibia that rented and sold 4x4s and other Safari stuff and that he donated a significant amount of money to wildlife preservation, specifically and ironically to protect the lion population.
I have no idea how wealthy he was, but he wasn't billionaire class, and has a solid track record. Perhaps more info will come out, but it's super shitty to say that someone got wealthy on the backs of other with nothing to back it up.
Everything I'm finding on the guy is that he was a big philanthropist that has dedicated a good portion of his life to defending Lions and nature. Unless you've got something better than, "hur dur, wealthy man got killed . Good", then your just an asshole.
I was being ironic, but my genuine comment in the opposite direction is also getting criticism. Economics arguments are very contentious here.
If that's true, then he deserves it.
*EDIT: I love that people will say 'hey, read up before forming an opinion', and just ignore that I'm literally not forming an opinion and acknowledging it's because I don't know. This is very unreasonable.
If what's true? He had money? Maybe read up on the dude for a minute and make a real opinion. Sounds like the guy was a stand-up individual.
You're saying that a man deserves to die by lion attack if he has money.
Lemmy is a cesspool sometimes.
False.
I'm saying a man deserves to die by lion attack if he robs people of their labor. Also, this is a hypothetical, as the first part of the sentence "if that's true" means we're discussing a hypothetical and not expressing an opinion on this specific case.
...not that I'd expect random folks on Lemmy to understand nuance, and maybe don't simply make things up and put words in other people's mouths while you're at it. Thank you.
Oh - I wasn't putting words in your mouth. I understood it was a "hypothetical". And it's still awful and you should be ashamed of yourself..
Meh. True value is debatable. What value did the person who came up with the idea and the person who risked capital to make it happen contribute?
how's the boot taste?
Lemmy never disappoints. I like it here.
What is the lowest wages/(wages+profits) (after all energy, taxes, transport, marketing costs are removed) ratio that workers should tolerate? I'd say a min of 70%, but OECD countries have slipped to 55%.
PS: Bear in mind that this microeconomic wage share links up with inequality macroeconomically. And inequality leads to the decay of democracies and rule of law (because with depressed wage share economic indicators you may still have great growth numbers, but if nobody feels it in their wallet, they go vote for the loudest village idiot)
I'm just writing this to be more constructive than the average tankie, but to also make it clear that the neoliberal approach to things has unintended social consequences that end up eating your pretty conceptions of markets, risk, investment and innovation and people are growing tired of it. FDR knew this, but nobody high up seems to care anymore about regulating these forces, because that would be "socialism".