3 ms·
Right and I agree with your main point. It's basically the point I'm trying to drive home. Communism isn't the solution, capitalism is better but has problems a
by crimsonalucard 11y ago
Right and I agree with your main point. It's basically the point I'm trying to drive home. Communism isn't the solution, capitalism is better but has problems as well. We should all work to resolve those problems even if capitalism is currently the best possible solution. Extreme Wealth inequality is a problem of unfairness and we should strive to resolve the problem without giving up the benefits that come with capitalism.
I disagree with the fact the billionaire can't be replaced. The billionaire isn't some special human being. I would argue if you replace the current CEO of apple with a random apple SW engineer, the company wouldn't change much.
In fact I would argue that skilled work, the work of software engineers is by far much more irreplaceable. The person who coded the critical infrastructure for the apple operating system, he is by far harder to replace then the billionaire on top. Also note: Steve jobs died, Apple stock has gone up since his death.
- throwaway_5561 11y agoI think your Apple example is helping to disprove your point. > I would argue if you replace the current CEO of apple with a random apple SW engineer, the company wouldn't change much. That's exactly what happened in the 80's - they forced Steve Jobs out, and the company lost all their market share and was on the verge on dying, before he came back. > Steve jobs died, Apple stock has gone up since his death. By that time, Steve Jobs knew he was going to die and picked his successor very carefully - Tim Cook is definitely a great choice. Some would argue, however, that Apple is still thriving because of Steve's ideas, and as soon as they run out of them, Apple will start to decline. The jury is still out on that one, however.