4 ms·
OK, so let's say Yanik has no costs at all -- he gets to take that entire $300,000 and put it right in his own pocket. Maybe lumber and concrete just fall out o
by Harkins 19y ago
OK, so let's say Yanik has no costs at all -- he gets to take that entire $300,000 and put it right in his own pocket. Maybe lumber and concrete just fall out of the sky for him, and people work for him free because he's such a nice guy who'll help you with his stereo.
But Yanik is selling his time, he's getting $300k for the time it takes him to manage a building's construction. Stein says he's "well on his way to being in the top 1 percent and, after that, the top one-tenth of 1 percent." Absolutely false.
Let's say Yanik can put up not one but three $300k buildings a year, because he's so talented. Great, he'll be a billionaire in just 1,111 years.
The wealthiest 1% of America isn't just a little ahead of the rest of us; as Stein correctly notes they're hugely ahead. It doesn't happen by trying harder at your job but by redefining the work, putting capital to work for you instead of going to work yourself.
- nazgulnarsil 19y agobingo. renting your labor has always been the least efficient way to make money. more efficient is renting your land, more efficient than that is renting your capital.