3 ms·
My reply was to build on your comment, not to tear down your position. Creating wealth is not a zero sum game, but... because noone can be certain of the prope
by jhancock 18y ago
My reply was to build on your comment, not to tear down your position.
Creating wealth is not a zero sum game, but... because noone can be certain of the proper amount of FU money one needs, you overreach (I don't mean "you" you, I mean anyone). It is precisely this that creates hordes of wealth "locked up". This is a highly inefficient model and does not scale to "all" people. You reach a point very quickly where maybe less than 20% can participate before you create inflation and devalue the equity, which in turn makes people raise their "FU quotient".
It creates a culture of continual acquisition of wealth due to the fear that not to do so means your relative wealth will decline. But what if everyone slows down? What if you can follow a well understood path to financial security that did not rob you of your life as a youth or your life as a parent or of your life as a spouse?
I'm not saying you or anyone else is a bad person for pursuing wealth. I am saying the model we have in which to do so is flawed. Most of us are aware it is flawed but don't bother to describe or attempt to fix it as there appears to be no alternate solution (i.e. we only live in one economy, we don't get to go hang out in a different one if we find the one we're in unappealing or flawed).
My hypothesis is that the only/best timing for creating alternate solutions is in harsh times. Times when people are hurting and willing to open their minds to new things. After all, this is the original secret of any entrepreneur: "find someone who is hurting, he'll take a chance on a tiny company he's never heard of." I think the same lessons apply to changing our local and global economy.