4 ms·

Most capitalists are not billionaires or even millionaires, the divide you are creating is outdated and frankly asinine.

• dragonwriter 4y ago
  > Most capitalists are not billionaires or even millionaires, Yes, they are, if one is referring to the capitalist class (the haut bourgeoisie), those who relate to the economy primarily through capital to which other’s rented labor is applied, not “everyone with some, however incidental, capital”. Heck, even most of the middle class (petit bourgeoisie, who either apply their own labor to their own capital or who otherwise are supported significantly by both labor and capital) are at least millionaires. The working class, who obligatorily depend on renting out their labor to capitalists may have some incidental capital and not be millionaires, but they very much are not capitalists.
  • bilvar 4y ago
    I'm referring to the capitalists as thought of in 21st century economics, not some outdated 19th century Marxist/extreme left-wing echo chamber (lol, 'haute bourgeoisie', are you even listening to yourself?). People who deploy and risk their capital to produce services or products are capitalists. e.g My local grocer is a capitalist or my grandfather running a family farm is a capitalist. I can tell you for sure my grandfather is not a millionaire, I'm not so sure about my local grocer, but I doubt it.
• oldstrangers 4y ago
  Reading your other comments, you've aggressively decided to dismiss the historical definition of the capitalist class because it doesn't suit your worldview. In that case there's essentially no conversation to be had because you're already operating from an alternative reality.
  • bilvar 4y ago
    Why do you think that Marx's definition of capitalist is the 'historical definition'? The term predates Marx. Moreover, words progressively change definitions depending on cultural and intellectual trends.
    • oldstrangers 4y ago
      Because... I wrote the comment, and in the context of my comment, I am referring to the traditional idea of a "capitalist class". There's also no new revised understanding of "capitalists" that includes everyone with a small business. Even in "21st century economics", a capitalist is still traditionally considered someone who owns the means of production at the absolute top of the supply chain (the owners and controllers of capital). Your local grocery story owner is still literally buying his inventory from a supplier. You follow that supply chain long enough, there's more than likely a billionaire at the end of it. That's the actual capitalist.
      • bilvar 4y ago
        Again, a capitalist is someone who deploys capital to provide a product or service. Not someone who is at the top of a supply chain. This is only the definition in Marxian 19th century economic theories. Saying that it's the historical definition shows lack of intellectual diversification. Supplying yourself X & Y goods from the market to produce Z good or service does not make you a labourer. By that logic is someone who owns a car factory NOT a capitalist because he needs to supply himself steel from another capitalist whose factories produce steel? Or is the steel factory owner NOT a capitalist because he needs to provide himself with tools from another capitalist? That makes completely no sense.
        • oldstrangers 4y ago
          You're saying a lot to say nothing, while being wildly incorrect with anything you do say. That's pretty impressive, considering you could just google your way out of this ignorance. Anyway, enjoy your alternate reality.