3 ms·

It doesn’t work in a capitalistic society, as capitalism only benefits, those who own. It’s my belief that we create enough resources in this world for everyone

It doesn’t work in a capitalistic society, as capitalism only benefits, those who own. It’s my belief that we create enough resources in this world for everyone to live a comfortable life but we don’t love one is because a few thousand people hoard all the resources and say we have to keep working.

gottorf 3y ago
> as capitalism only benefits, those who own A rising tide lifts all boats, and that is what has borne out by historical fact for capitalism. The easiest way to see how it benefits everyone, even the poorest, is to look at the median person's living standards in places that don't have "capitalism" (which in this context is shorthand for rule of law, strong private property rights, and a market economy). > a few thousand people hoard all the resources The mega-ultra-rich (the top richest few thousand people in the world, like you said) aren't piling vaults with gold, Scrooge McDuck style. Their wealth is the productive assets they own, almost always companies that generate value for consumers. Besides, the net worth of all American billionaires combined is about four and a half trillion dollars[0]. Even if you could magically confiscate all of that "money" at that same valuation (which you can't, since you cannot liquidate a stock and expect it to fetch the same price) and redistribute it to everyone, that's a whopping bonus of $13.5k to every man, woman, and child in this country. Do you seriously imagine everyone can stop working and live happy lives with that money? Put another way, $4.5T is not even five years of Social Security. What happens next? > we have to keep working I'm not really sure what you think the alternative is. As pg said, wealth is what people want[1], whether that's an AC unit to keep yourself cool if you live in a hot place, or heating oil to keep yourself warm if you live in a cool place, or a flight to Paris for a vacation, or filet mignon, or rice and beans, or a can of Coke, or a glass of wine. Every single one of those things takes labor to produce. If all rich people ceased to exist, it will not change the fact that you cannot wave a magic wand and put food on your table. [0]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1291685/us-combined-value-billionaire-wealth/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1291685/us-combined-valu... [1]: http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > A rising tide lifts all boats, and that is what has borne out by historical fact for capitalism. To a point and then not, which is why capitalism in tbe narrow sense was rejected generally in the early-mid-20th century in favor of the modern mixed econony, which, like strict capitalism before it, is almost certainly not the end of the road on the advancement of economic systems.
- pixl97 3y ago
  >A rising tide lifts all boats, and that is what has borne out by historical fact for capitalism. This also misses that it does so by FORCING said highest boats to pay the state/federal taxes in which are used to ensure those with sinking boats don't turn into pirates to stay alive. >The mega-ultra-rich (the top richest few thousand people in the world, like you said) aren't piling vaults with gold, Scrooge McDuck style. Their wealth is the productive assets they own, almost always companies that generate value for consumers. Because we incentive investment. If we did not there would be plenty of ultra mega rich sitting on piles of gold pretending they were dragons. Every damned discussion I see about this tries to pain everything in a binary when it's a far more complicated topic. The wealthy are far better off putting some sizeable portion of their wealth to ensure society works because it creates a feedback cycle where both their wealth, and the gross wealth of the society increases, and the society is one that is generally safer to take part in.

gottorf 3y ago

> as capitalism only benefits, those who own A rising tide lifts all boats, and that is what has borne out by historical fact for capitalism. The easiest way to see how it benefits everyone, even the poorest, is to look at the median person's living standards in places that don't have "capitalism" (which in this context is shorthand for rule of law, strong private property rights, and a market economy). > a few thousand people hoard all the resources The mega-ultra-rich (the top richest few thousand people in the world, like you said) aren't piling vaults with gold, Scrooge McDuck style. Their wealth is the productive assets they own, almost always companies that generate value for consumers. Besides, the net worth of all American billionaires combined is about four and a half trillion dollars[0]. Even if you could magically confiscate all of that "money" at that same valuation (which you can't, since you cannot liquidate a stock and expect it to fetch the same price) and redistribute it to everyone, that's a whopping bonus of $13.5k to every man, woman, and child in this country. Do you seriously imagine everyone can stop working and live happy lives with that money? Put another way, $4.5T is not even five years of Social Security. What happens next? > we have to keep working I'm not really sure what you think the alternative is. As pg said, wealth is what people want[1], whether that's an AC unit to keep yourself cool if you live in a hot place, or heating oil to keep yourself warm if you live in a cool place, or a flight to Paris for a vacation, or filet mignon, or rice and beans, or a can of Coke, or a glass of wine. Every single one of those things takes labor to produce. If all rich people ceased to exist, it will not change the fact that you cannot wave a magic wand and put food on your table. [0]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1291685/us-combined-value-billionaire-wealth/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1291685/us-combined-valu... [1]: http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html

dragonwriter 3y ago
> A rising tide lifts all boats, and that is what has borne out by historical fact for capitalism. To a point and then not, which is why capitalism in tbe narrow sense was rejected generally in the early-mid-20th century in favor of the modern mixed econony, which, like strict capitalism before it, is almost certainly not the end of the road on the advancement of economic systems.
pixl97 3y ago
>A rising tide lifts all boats, and that is what has borne out by historical fact for capitalism. This also misses that it does so by FORCING said highest boats to pay the state/federal taxes in which are used to ensure those with sinking boats don't turn into pirates to stay alive. >The mega-ultra-rich (the top richest few thousand people in the world, like you said) aren't piling vaults with gold, Scrooge McDuck style. Their wealth is the productive assets they own, almost always companies that generate value for consumers. Because we incentive investment. If we did not there would be plenty of ultra mega rich sitting on piles of gold pretending they were dragons. Every damned discussion I see about this tries to pain everything in a binary when it's a far more complicated topic. The wealthy are far better off putting some sizeable portion of their wealth to ensure society works because it creates a feedback cycle where both their wealth, and the gross wealth of the society increases, and the society is one that is generally safer to take part in.