4 ms·

I think this challenges us to consider two questions: 1) Does he deserve this money based on the things he did? 2) Should any one person, regardless of how mu

by jawns 3y ago

I think this challenges us to consider two questions: 1) Does he deserve this money based on the things he did? 2) Should any one person, regardless of how much they deserve it, hold this much wealth? This comments section shows that people disagree strongly about both #1 and #2. But I think even if you answer YES to #1, you can still build a reasonable case that the answer to #2 should be NO. And if that's the case, I don't think the resentment comes from the fact that he's got all this money and didn't properly earn it. Instead, it comes from the fact that when you have one person with this nearly unfathomable amount of wealth (and power), there are a lot of second- or third-order consequences that are undesirable. I am a distributist, of the classical type represented by G.K. Chesterton, and believe that society works best when the ownership of productive property is widely distributed. That doesn't mean I believe in robinhoodism (i.e. forcible redistributions of wealth), but that concentrated ownership is to be avoided, and public policy should reflect this.

monero-xmr 3y ago
What's great about the free market is that your and my concept of "deserving" is irrelevant. We can have totally opposing moral compasses and intellectual opinions on all manner of topics, but the buyers determine who deserves what. And the market determined he deserved it. If you want that money, you make a better product in the market. I think that's what drives leftists crazy - that no matter how much they hem and haw, they can't force the market to bend to their own version of morality. If you want to dethrone amazon, then create something better that free people choose with their own wallets.
- notaustinpowers 3y ago
  The concept of the free market does not exist in modern American society. Free market relies on the concept of supply and demand being the sole basis of an economic system. Amazon's lobbying efforts to congress. Strongarm tactics for establishing warehouses in small towns with promises of high pay (effectively forcing a large population of a towns workforce to leave local jobs, building a reliance on Amazon within that community as few other businesses can provide what Amazon provides). Amazon has the money and the power to bend the market to their own will. That's not a free market. They have the supply, and they'll force your demand to them one way or another.
  - monero-xmr 3y ago
    You are following absolutist thinking. There are indeed aspects that make America not a perfect free market. But is a free-er market than any other large developed economy. I purchase from Amazon, as well as many other web and brick-and-mortar stores. Amazon does not force me at gunpoint to buy from them. I don't understand why building a warehouse in a small town, where people voluntarily start to work for them (presumably by offering better pay, working conditions, and opportunity) is a bad thing. You have a zero-sum, incorrect understanding of market forces and how the economy works.
    - notaustinpowers 3y ago
      Because the idea of free market capitalism, in the way Amazon lobbies for, is detrimental to the common good of the people. Which, per our own Constitution, is supposed to be the primary focus of our government. Free market capitalism (specifically Amazon's method) significantly results in market dominance, a macro-economic reliance on that company succeeding, and reduces social mobility among working class Americans. Market Dominance: Amazon has, in basic terms, brought upon the Walmart Effect throughout the US. And exacerbates the effect within the small towns where they build their warehouses. Macro-Economic Reliance: As Amazon employs 1.1m Americans, the macro-economics of America have become reliant on Amazon succeeding. Resulting in a fear, or at least a trepidation, in interfering with whatever Amazon wants to do. The threat of mass layoffs due to any state/local/federal regulations would have profound effects of the American economy. Something that, back when free market capitalism was seen as the most equal way to ensure competition, was not possible, and most likely not even conceived as being likely. Reduction in Social Mobility: Building off of the Market Dominance bit, this reduction in wages and revenue for small businesses/local businesses reduces the ability of everyday American citizens to build a successful business to provide social mobility for them and their children. And for employees, yes, they make great money working at an Amazon factory. But talk to many Amazon employees and they'll tell you it's grueling, backbreaking work. And when they have enough and decide to quit or are fired there are, typically, no jobs in their local area that either pay that well or that they may qualify for. I'm not saying Amazon is forcing you at gunpoint to buy from them. I'm saying that Amazon, due to our government's failure to intervene earlier on in their growth, has crafted the free market around them, has made it to where it's more difficult/annoying/impossible to not buy from them.
- troupe 3y ago
  But then whoever successfully creates a company that replaces Amazon will be wealthy. If the goal is to try to make sure no one becomes and outlier success, we can't have that. :) People complain that some people get extremely rich but fail to realize that they do so by increasing the average standard of living for a large number of people. Amazon provides conveniences that did not exist 50 years ago and it does make people's lives easier, provides more free time, provides jobs for a large number of workers, provides companies a way to get their products to customers, etc.
  - jawns 3y ago
    Are you familiar with "The Wal-Mart Effect"? It describes the impact on local economies when a Wal-Mart opens. Spoiler: It isn't good. Far from being a net producer of good, decent-paying jobs, it tends to wreck the local competition, driving small-business owners out of business and into low-wage employment. These days, "The Amazon Effect" is probably even more worrisome, because it's much more diffuse. When companies can rely entirely on economies of scale, rather than innovation, to crush competition, it's possible to have immediate effects (such as lower prices) that are beneficial, but knock-on effects (such as the broader impact on the economy and the quality of jobs available) that are insidious and deleterious.
    - troupe 3y ago
      Yes. Walmart has a big impact on local economies. Especially small rural communities. Tractors had a similar impact on agricultural workers when they started displacing labor. If you calculate what impact Walmart has had on the average standard of living, would you claim that it has driven it lower? There are obviously going to be some people and segments that aren't able to adapt quickly, but that is the case with anything...and even those individuals are going to benefit from goods being available at lower prices.
      - monero-xmr 3y ago
        It’s amazing how people worship this supposedly perfect former world of “mom and pop shops”, ignoring the terrible prices and selection. Wal Mart won because consumers liked it better - far better. If we wanted to subsidize tiny stores that were worse on every metric, you are essentially making a museum or charity, at the cost of damaging the entire society via higher prices and worse products.
- wackget 3y ago
  "The free market" will always result in: * Companies doing what's best for their profits; not what's best for people. * Companies becoming so large that they are literally impossible to compete with. * Customers choosing what's cheapest and/or most convenient for themselves, regardless of human/societal/environmental cost. Defending this concept of a "free market" is an excuse for saying "making money in a way which doesn't hurt the world is too hard for me so let's not even try".
  - monero-xmr 3y ago
    Why have the biggest companies on earth risen and fallen? And sometimes risen again? What seems indestructible now, may be a failure in 10 years. Blackberry, Kodak, IBM, US Steel, Blockbuster, Direct TV. These companies are far smaller proportionally to what they once were. No one considers them empires, or on the cutting edge. Hand waving away the free market as corrupt ignores the perfect track record of capitalist societies vs. every other single system ever tried.
xyzelement 3y ago
In general, I can agree with your view as a good outcome. But the problem is - who gets to decide what is too much? I see you're in tech and an author (btw, I've come across your book before, congrats!) and I bet MOST people would also think that you have "too much" because it's more than them, and "what do you really do to earn it? type on a keyboard? That's not real work." Because I don't want to someone to have the power to say "hey xyzelement, your FAANG salary is unreasonable and we're going to take it away for greater good" (and ditto for my wife's medical salary), I don't feel it's right to do it to anyone else.
- itishappy 3y ago
  I find "your salary is too much and we're taking it away from you" to be extremely reductive. (Even, dare I say, maliciously obtuse.) This isn't some radical policy change, it's more or less how our current system was designed, if we chose to enforce it. Instead, you and your wife probably pay more taxes than our ultra-rich. Offloading that burden onto everybody else does not feel right to me. https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trove-of-never-before-seen-records-reveal-how-the-wealthiest-avoid-income-tax https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trov...

by jawns 3y ago

monero-xmr 3y ago

What's great about the free market is that your and my concept of "deserving" is irrelevant. We can have totally opposing moral compasses and intellectual opinions on all manner of topics, but the buyers determine who deserves what. And the market determined he deserved it. If you want that money, you make a better product in the market. I think that's what drives leftists crazy - that no matter how much they hem and haw, they can't force the market to bend to their own version of morality. If you want to dethrone amazon, then create something better that free people choose with their own wallets.

notaustinpowers 3y ago
The concept of the free market does not exist in modern American society. Free market relies on the concept of supply and demand being the sole basis of an economic system. Amazon's lobbying efforts to congress. Strongarm tactics for establishing warehouses in small towns with promises of high pay (effectively forcing a large population of a towns workforce to leave local jobs, building a reliance on Amazon within that community as few other businesses can provide what Amazon provides). Amazon has the money and the power to bend the market to their own will. That's not a free market. They have the supply, and they'll force your demand to them one way or another.
- monero-xmr 3y ago
  You are following absolutist thinking. There are indeed aspects that make America not a perfect free market. But is a free-er market than any other large developed economy. I purchase from Amazon, as well as many other web and brick-and-mortar stores. Amazon does not force me at gunpoint to buy from them. I don't understand why building a warehouse in a small town, where people voluntarily start to work for them (presumably by offering better pay, working conditions, and opportunity) is a bad thing. You have a zero-sum, incorrect understanding of market forces and how the economy works.
  - notaustinpowers 3y ago
    Because the idea of free market capitalism, in the way Amazon lobbies for, is detrimental to the common good of the people. Which, per our own Constitution, is supposed to be the primary focus of our government. Free market capitalism (specifically Amazon's method) significantly results in market dominance, a macro-economic reliance on that company succeeding, and reduces social mobility among working class Americans. Market Dominance: Amazon has, in basic terms, brought upon the Walmart Effect throughout the US. And exacerbates the effect within the small towns where they build their warehouses. Macro-Economic Reliance: As Amazon employs 1.1m Americans, the macro-economics of America have become reliant on Amazon succeeding. Resulting in a fear, or at least a trepidation, in interfering with whatever Amazon wants to do. The threat of mass layoffs due to any state/local/federal regulations would have profound effects of the American economy. Something that, back when free market capitalism was seen as the most equal way to ensure competition, was not possible, and most likely not even conceived as being likely. Reduction in Social Mobility: Building off of the Market Dominance bit, this reduction in wages and revenue for small businesses/local businesses reduces the ability of everyday American citizens to build a successful business to provide social mobility for them and their children. And for employees, yes, they make great money working at an Amazon factory. But talk to many Amazon employees and they'll tell you it's grueling, backbreaking work. And when they have enough and decide to quit or are fired there are, typically, no jobs in their local area that either pay that well or that they may qualify for. I'm not saying Amazon is forcing you at gunpoint to buy from them. I'm saying that Amazon, due to our government's failure to intervene earlier on in their growth, has crafted the free market around them, has made it to where it's more difficult/annoying/impossible to not buy from them.
troupe 3y ago
But then whoever successfully creates a company that replaces Amazon will be wealthy. If the goal is to try to make sure no one becomes and outlier success, we can't have that. :) People complain that some people get extremely rich but fail to realize that they do so by increasing the average standard of living for a large number of people. Amazon provides conveniences that did not exist 50 years ago and it does make people's lives easier, provides more free time, provides jobs for a large number of workers, provides companies a way to get their products to customers, etc.
- jawns 3y ago
  Are you familiar with "The Wal-Mart Effect"? It describes the impact on local economies when a Wal-Mart opens. Spoiler: It isn't good. Far from being a net producer of good, decent-paying jobs, it tends to wreck the local competition, driving small-business owners out of business and into low-wage employment. These days, "The Amazon Effect" is probably even more worrisome, because it's much more diffuse. When companies can rely entirely on economies of scale, rather than innovation, to crush competition, it's possible to have immediate effects (such as lower prices) that are beneficial, but knock-on effects (such as the broader impact on the economy and the quality of jobs available) that are insidious and deleterious.
  - troupe 3y ago
    Yes. Walmart has a big impact on local economies. Especially small rural communities. Tractors had a similar impact on agricultural workers when they started displacing labor. If you calculate what impact Walmart has had on the average standard of living, would you claim that it has driven it lower? There are obviously going to be some people and segments that aren't able to adapt quickly, but that is the case with anything...and even those individuals are going to benefit from goods being available at lower prices.
    - monero-xmr 3y ago
      It’s amazing how people worship this supposedly perfect former world of “mom and pop shops”, ignoring the terrible prices and selection. Wal Mart won because consumers liked it better - far better. If we wanted to subsidize tiny stores that were worse on every metric, you are essentially making a museum or charity, at the cost of damaging the entire society via higher prices and worse products.
wackget 3y ago
"The free market" will always result in: * Companies doing what's best for their profits; not what's best for people. * Companies becoming so large that they are literally impossible to compete with. * Customers choosing what's cheapest and/or most convenient for themselves, regardless of human/societal/environmental cost. Defending this concept of a "free market" is an excuse for saying "making money in a way which doesn't hurt the world is too hard for me so let's not even try".
- monero-xmr 3y ago
  Why have the biggest companies on earth risen and fallen? And sometimes risen again? What seems indestructible now, may be a failure in 10 years. Blackberry, Kodak, IBM, US Steel, Blockbuster, Direct TV. These companies are far smaller proportionally to what they once were. No one considers them empires, or on the cutting edge. Hand waving away the free market as corrupt ignores the perfect track record of capitalist societies vs. every other single system ever tried.

xyzelement 3y ago

In general, I can agree with your view as a good outcome. But the problem is - who gets to decide what is too much? I see you're in tech and an author (btw, I've come across your book before, congrats!) and I bet MOST people would also think that you have "too much" because it's more than them, and "what do you really do to earn it? type on a keyboard? That's not real work." Because I don't want to someone to have the power to say "hey xyzelement, your FAANG salary is unreasonable and we're going to take it away for greater good" (and ditto for my wife's medical salary), I don't feel it's right to do it to anyone else.

itishappy 3y ago
I find "your salary is too much and we're taking it away from you" to be extremely reductive. (Even, dare I say, maliciously obtuse.) This isn't some radical policy change, it's more or less how our current system was designed, if we chose to enforce it. Instead, you and your wife probably pay more taxes than our ultra-rich. Offloading that burden onto everybody else does not feel right to me. https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trove-of-never-before-seen-records-reveal-how-the-wealthiest-avoid-income-tax https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trov...