3 ms·

because... I haven't worked hard and saved money? or, like you are implying, I shouldn't have saved any money, and spent it all... fancy cars, exotic vacations

by antr 10y ago

because... I haven't worked hard and saved money? or, like you are implying, I shouldn't have saved any money, and spent it all... fancy cars, exotic vacations, and parties. I guess I gave up one lifestyle to reach another one. We all have different priorities.

branchless 10y ago
I don't believe land is taxed highly enough so the system encourages monopolising land to appropriate value added by labour that should be going to workers. I think right now we have a situation were money makes money and selling your labour doesn't, in the average case not in the "I'm a senior engineer at google" case. I just don't see how this ends well. Workers struggling to get wage rises at all and yet 5% per anum return for those with capital. We've just had Trump and yet here everyone is basically saying "I can get further ahead by playing the system". It's not looking good.
- antr 10y ago
  Relax, you are mixing apples and oranges. Many companies, large multinationals to small startups don't want to OWN property. It's capital intensive for them, they want to rent. Does Starbucks own its coffee shops? No. Can't you see how renting property is a service to many? Stop being apocalyptic simply because someone owns property. Take a chill pill.
  - jdcarluccio 10y ago
    You should offer chill pills as part of the property deal. :) like your style
  - branchless 10y ago
    I think this is a huge problem. I think that is illustrated by the fact that you feel you can make well ahead of wage rises without any risk. The financialisation of land is driving a wedge between those with capital and those without. We've just had Trump because some people are feeling very left behind. I'm not saying you caused Trump, but I think the system that incorporates rent seeking through land is a big part of it. Land prices are all consuming, they are taking wages from workers and then rent from net wages of workers. The system as it stands is very efficient at adjusting credit to soak up any gains into banking and land speculators.

by antr 10y ago

branchless 10y ago

I don't believe land is taxed highly enough so the system encourages monopolising land to appropriate value added by labour that should be going to workers. I think right now we have a situation were money makes money and selling your labour doesn't, in the average case not in the "I'm a senior engineer at google" case. I just don't see how this ends well. Workers struggling to get wage rises at all and yet 5% per anum return for those with capital. We've just had Trump and yet here everyone is basically saying "I can get further ahead by playing the system". It's not looking good.

antr 10y ago
Relax, you are mixing apples and oranges. Many companies, large multinationals to small startups don't want to OWN property. It's capital intensive for them, they want to rent. Does Starbucks own its coffee shops? No. Can't you see how renting property is a service to many? Stop being apocalyptic simply because someone owns property. Take a chill pill.
- jdcarluccio 10y ago
  You should offer chill pills as part of the property deal. :) like your style
- branchless 10y ago
  I think this is a huge problem. I think that is illustrated by the fact that you feel you can make well ahead of wage rises without any risk. The financialisation of land is driving a wedge between those with capital and those without. We've just had Trump because some people are feeling very left behind. I'm not saying you caused Trump, but I think the system that incorporates rent seeking through land is a big part of it. Land prices are all consuming, they are taking wages from workers and then rent from net wages of workers. The system as it stands is very efficient at adjusting credit to soak up any gains into banking and land speculators.