> It is the capital that Marcus has to offer that makes business owners listen to him It would be fun to take on the challenge of converting the author to soci

> It is the capital that Marcus has to offer that makes business owners listen to him It would be fun to take on the challenge of converting the author to socialism, but I'm not sure if the author is making the call at the end of the article in good faith. Related to what I quoted-- many, perhaps the majority, of reality shows don't rely on offers of capital injections to improve the social problems that plague business owners. Gordon Ramsey usually breaks through because he's loudly yelling his credentials at some stubborn restaurant owner. Or the bar rescue guy is yelling to the entire staff that the bartenders were stealing drinks to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars (as well as yelling his credentials to them). I mean they obviously tie in ads for various products that they give away to the owners, but a) that's never central to the business and b) I don't think they do that on every single show like that. Human credibility and peer pressure exist in a socialist setting. That in no way is an argument for socialism, but it is at least an argument that one of the author's premises is probably mistaken-- i.e., that the guru needs capital in order to convince a failing owner to turn their business around. So, would the author care to refine the argument? If so I'd be willing to take the challenge further.