5 ms·
It's more interesting to me to contemplate why inequality is a bad for a society. The greatest wealth is typically built by creating the largest businesses. If
by 11thEarlOfMar 5y ago
It's more interesting to me to contemplate why inequality is a bad for a society. The greatest wealth is typically built by creating the largest businesses. If we look at the wealthiest people in the world, their wealth is derived from business, rather than sports and entertainment, state-owned operations, confiscation via war, illegal activities, etc. Creating business at the scale of these companies, and the economic activity that yields is the core of a capitalist system. It's better for everyone in it's purest form.
Problems start with the super-wealthy apply their wealth outside of business and industry and use it to influence political outcomes. In this manner, they are acting as un-elected politicians and undermine democratic policies and governance.
The question to contemplate is how to maintain the system that yields the most benefit in its pure form, and yet keep its vulnerability of concentrating influence in the hands of people who are not granted that influence democratically?
- PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago> Creating business at the scale of these companies, and the economic activity that yields is the core of a capitalist system. It's better for everyone in it's purest form. Asserted without evidence. There's no inherent reason that a world in which ubiquitous e-commerce was the name of the game, but there was no Amazon, and in which all of the employees in this sector made middle-class income, should be impossible. Would that be a better world than ours, even though it could still be entirely capitalist? I would say so.