> The logical conclusion to that would be that everyone wants to be an employee and nobody wants to be an employer. This is interesting. Let's say there is a a

> The logical conclusion to that would be that everyone wants to be an employee and nobody wants to be an employer. This is interesting. Let's say there is a a r=g, to r is slightly less than g world. Then people would try to maximize employment & investing that income. Sortof double dipping. Am I thinking about that correctly? Also, r<g doesn't mean that you're 'never' going to make more than the growth in output, right? Theoretically good stewards would outpace the market.