So what are we saying? Destruction of people's property is cool if it passes some arbitrary threshold that seems like they must be "well off" to own that property?

Does that also mean it's cool to rob anyone who owns a macbook, on the assumption they'd have a cheaper laptop if they weren't loaded?

Where I live, the taxi drivers primarily are driving Teslas and other electric cars because they do crazy mileage for their job and so over time the Tesla is actually the most economical choice for them. And that's just a regular working class job.

[–] humandotexe@sopuli.xyz 3 points 7 hours ago

I'm saying it's cool if the property belongs to a Nazi or a Nazi sympathizer.

[–] sanpo@sopuli.xyz -1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I’m not excusing burning down innocent people’s property

[–] tiramichu@lemm.ee 8 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Well you said those words, but then followed on by saying what seems to be an excuse for exactly that - effectively they are rich so they can afford it

[–] taxiiiii@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

The original commenter said that burning down Teslas might destroy the owners life. This is a car that costs somewhere between 40000 (?) and 150000 dollars. Someone who can afford that is highly likely to recover. That's what this commenter pointed out.

Stating that isn't saying that it's cool to burn down a random person's car.

[–] tiramichu@lemm.ee 1 points 4 hours ago

Fair :)