3 ms·
> You have a lot of faith, it seems, in the ability of the already rich to somehow make better decisions Not at all. A large fraction of the "already rich" did
by pdonis 3y ago
> You have a lot of faith, it seems, in the ability of the already rich to somehow make better decisions
Not at all. A large fraction of the "already rich" did not get their wealth by productive efforts. They got it by convincing other people to take the wrong end of zero sum trades, thus siphoning wealth out of other people's pockets into their own. Even in the case of Jeff Bezos, who has certainly created a lot of wealth through Amazon, it's also true that his own personal wealth is not entirely due to that productive effort; a significant part of it is due to Amazon playing zero sum games with its supply chain and its workers.
In other words, the real problem is not wealth accumulation, but wealth accumulation through zero sum games, or more generally through gaming the system instead of producing. (There was a pg essay on this years ago.)
- WalterBright 3y ago> a significant part of it is due to Amazon playing zero sum games with its supply chain and its workers Why would any worker or supplier do an exchange with Amazon where they lose?
- pdonis 3y agoBecause they don't realize it's a zero sum game until they're already playing it, and then their exit options are limited.
- WalterBright 3y agoPeople quit Amazon all the time. Nobody is chained to their desk. Zero-sum games are called "theft", "fraud" and/or "wealth redistribution" schemes.
- vacuity 3y agoBeing able to quit a terrible workplace doesn't imply that one has achieved a reasonable standard of living and is just making more money. Indeed, if people continue working at a workplace where they're subjected to conditions they think are terrible, they probably don't do it just to make more money.
- WalterBright 3y agoIt doesn't mean it's zero sum, either.
- vacuity 3y agoZero sum is likely an exaggeration, but the conditions can get quite bad.