4 ms·

Say the top 1% increase their proportion of wealth from 20% to 40% of the money supply. Since there's only a finite amount of stuff to buy (productivity), this

Say the top 1% increase their proportion of wealth from 20% to 40% of the money supply. Since there's only a finite amount of stuff to buy (productivity), this means the rich can also buy a proportionally bigger amount of stuff. Now, yes, this money gets in the hands of whoever is selling but in our current world this is increasingly also the rich. They're slowly buying up all real estate, companies, securities etc. capturing an ever increasing slice of economic surplus. This capture is exactly how the proportion of their wealth gets bigger and bigger, while wages are under pressure and haven't increased at all. It's not entirely zero sum, some investments increase productivity and thus create actual wealth. Unfortunately investment in stocks and real estate don't increase productivity at all while rent-seeking only directs an ever increasing proportion of available wealth towards rich people.

leetcrew 7y ago
> Say the top 1% increase their proportion of wealth from 20% to 40% of the money supply. Since there's only a finite amount of stuff to buy (productivity), this means the rich can also buy a proportionally bigger amount of stuff. yes, the money supply and real productivity are disconnected from each other, but it's hard to imagine such a huge change in control of the money supply over a period where real productivity is held constant. > It's not entirely zero sum, some investments increase productivity and thus create actual wealth. Unfortunately investment in stocks and real estate don't increase productivity at all while rent-seeking only directs an ever increasing proportion of available wealth towards rich people. if there are some investments that increase productivity, but they aren't stocks or real estate, what investments do increase productivity?
- Droobfest 7y ago
  I just meant the 20% and 40% as an illustration how increased wealth can make others lose out if productivity doesn't increase proportionally, I wouldn't read too much into it. Starting/growing a company is the obvious investment that increases productivity (pg isn't wrong). But selling your labor also increases it on a smaller scale, as long as you don't replace someone else. Actually literally anything that creates anything increases productivity. Even creating bitcoins in a sense does (but trading them doesn't)... until they crash. But real estate and stocks only move ownership from one person to another. They don't create anything. Even issuing new stock only moves ownership.

leetcrew 7y ago

> Say the top 1% increase their proportion of wealth from 20% to 40% of the money supply. Since there's only a finite amount of stuff to buy (productivity), this means the rich can also buy a proportionally bigger amount of stuff. yes, the money supply and real productivity are disconnected from each other, but it's hard to imagine such a huge change in control of the money supply over a period where real productivity is held constant. > It's not entirely zero sum, some investments increase productivity and thus create actual wealth. Unfortunately investment in stocks and real estate don't increase productivity at all while rent-seeking only directs an ever increasing proportion of available wealth towards rich people. if there are some investments that increase productivity, but they aren't stocks or real estate, what investments do increase productivity?

Droobfest 7y ago
I just meant the 20% and 40% as an illustration how increased wealth can make others lose out if productivity doesn't increase proportionally, I wouldn't read too much into it. Starting/growing a company is the obvious investment that increases productivity (pg isn't wrong). But selling your labor also increases it on a smaller scale, as long as you don't replace someone else. Actually literally anything that creates anything increases productivity. Even creating bitcoins in a sense does (but trading them doesn't)... until they crash. But real estate and stocks only move ownership from one person to another. They don't create anything. Even issuing new stock only moves ownership.