4 ms·
What I want to see is figures on consumption. Fundamentally, who really cares about wealth? They are just numbers in a bank account somewhere. Whoever is go
by justonepost 9y ago
What I want to see is figures on consumption. Fundamentally, who really cares about wealth? They are just numbers in a bank account somewhere. Whoever is good at growing those numbers without causing inflation - more power to them.
What we need is to redistribute consumption, not wealth.
Punish the rich for wasting resources on buying super cars and yachts and mansions, don't punish them for innovating and working hard.
- fluxic 9y ago>Punish the rich for wasting resources on buying super cars and yachts and mansions, don't punish them for innovating and working hard. Harder than 82% of the other population? Lol.
- hi-im-mi-ih 9y agoThis is Marxism at it finest: boil the complex reality of the wealth generation and the economic productivity of the super rich into a seductive narrative about oppression using a ratio that you actually wrote incorrectly: Harder than 99% of the other population? Lol. If you punish the most productive members of a society and redistribute wealth in any way that adheres to the oppression narrative, there will be absolutely disastrous consequences. This is because your perception how wealth is distributed is flawed - It is not the tyranny of the 1% that creates their wealth, it is their sacrifice. Remember, they only get rich if they sell something that is cheap to huge numbers of desiring consumers (a very difficult endeavor), or if they provide a useful service to large-scale businesses (a similarly difficult exercise). Both of those are good activities to have performed by intelligent, hard working individuals, because they provide a unique and often impossible-to-duplicate value to their customers that truly enrich their lives.
- _olivier_ 9y agoTo be more precise, 82/18=4.5 times as hard as the combined remaining 99% of the population.
- fluxic 9y ago>It is not the tyranny of the 1% that creates their wealth, it is their sacrifice. http://digg.com/2017/wyatt-ingraham-koch-shirts http://digg.com/2017/wyatt-ingraham-koch-shirts
- hi-im-mi-ih 9y agoYou need to refute the central point of my argument, not provide a counterexample as you have done.
- dariosalvi78 9y agoWe are all grown adults here and there is no need to point out that those earnings are not justified by a relatively higher 'sacrifice' or work. Being poor is a high sacrifice enough.
- hi-im-mi-ih 9y agoBeing poor is not a sacrifice. Being poor is a condition in the terms of your life. A sacrifice is being frugal, being diligent, and working hard at self-improvement - Do all poor people do that consistently, as a quality of being poor? Of course not; being poor is a condition, it is not a sacrifice. It holds no merit as a condition. You cannot use your lack of capital as a bargaining chip at the table. It is not a sign of your deserving more money. If you work hard and do something good for me, that I am willing to pay for, then you deserve money. Capitalism is altruistic. It functions when people do good, valuable things for each other and establish trust that payment will be provided for that value. It has nothing to do with your status as poor.
- fluxic 9y ago>Capitalism is altruistic. It functions when people do good, valuable things for each other and establish trust that payment will be provided for that value. It has nothing to do with your status as poor. Like selling addictive opioids, scam affiliate marketing subscriptions, atmosphere-ruining fossil fuels, attention-destroying social media sites (often targeted at children!), society-destroying social media bots, arcane financial products whose only purpose is to shield immense wealth from taxes or regulation, etc. etc. Yeah, capitalism sure is great, ain't it.
- justonepost 9y agoYes, tragedy of the commons is a perfect example of how capitalism can fail.
- drukenemo 9y agoWell, let's stop the internet too then. It has all of these things in it! It can't be any good then.
- justonepost 9y agoAbsolutely... 82% of the rest of the population really has no idea on how to properly do capital allocation. The Warren Buffets of the world are pretty rare. But seriously, who cares if some guy is controlling how 10 billion dollars get invested? He certainly knows better on how to do it than I do. What upsets me is when that guy siphons money off of that 10 billion and buys some stupidly large house which is utterly useless to society at large.
- thinkloop 9y agoWhat size house do you recommend?
- zimpenfish 9y ago> But seriously, who cares if some guy is controlling how 10 billion dollars get invested? He certainly knows better on how to do it than I do. I wouldn't be entirely sure about that given how poorly most funds seem to do against the bare stock market.
- monob 9y agoIf no one cares about wealth I'm sure the wealthy won't mind a 100% wealth tax then. After all it's only numbers in a bank account.
- fouc 9y agoThere are jobs and companies that build & maintain the super cars, yachts, and mansions. If you punish that consumption, you'll also punish everyone that's benefiting.
- justonepost 9y agoSure, but those are STUPID jobs. They only innovate for the 1%. It's a redirection of global resources into something that only serves the rich. If we had a consumption tax that redirected all spending into things that help everyone, than all of these things we fret about will go away. The great capital allocators of the world will still be able to be the great, rich capital allocators of the world, but minus all the wasteful toys. They'll serve mankind doing what they do best without siphoning off important innovation and resources.
- thinkloop 9y agoI doubt you'll have many capital allocators in that world.
- justonepost 9y agoWarren Buffet seems to like that world and he's pretty good at it.