3 ms·
> No one is ever going to convince me that the 1% have so much merit that they deserve more wealth than billions of people. I am not trying to. I am just point
by nickpp 5y ago
> No one is ever going to convince me that the 1% have so much merit that they deserve more wealth than billions of people.
I am not trying to. I am just pointing out the fact that if you want to eliminate the top of the pyramid (the 1%) you will lose the rest of it too.
It is the exact same free-market mechanisms that allows both to exist. And you are not proposing anything better instead.
- ModernMech 5y ago> I am just pointing out the fact that if you want to eliminate the top of the pyramid (the 1%) you will lose the rest of it too. That's not a fact you've proven (at least not here), it's just something you believe to be true.
- nickpp 5y agoIt was explained multiple times throughout this very thread. And it’s been proven in the real world in multiple countries. The fact that you don’t want to accept this (“No one is ever going to convince me”) makes it just something you have decided not to believe.
- ModernMech 5y agoYou really haven't though. If you feel you have, cite it, but I'm not seeing it. All that's been asserted is that communism is terrible. I don't see how that proves that if billionaires don't exist then value can't be created. I'm not even arguing for communism. In fact you were the first one to bring communism into the discussion. You haven't shown that one leads to the other. You're trying to use the USSR as an existence proof for your claim but the conclusion doesn't follow the premise. You have to make the connection if you want to make that claim. You've asserted that if there are no billionaires, it follows there will be no businesses. That's a very strong claim that demands very strong proof.