3 ms·
> Who will buy the phones when no one is paid to produce them? The cars? The food and the clothes? Other wealthy people. I knew someone in the yacht-building b
by ryandrake 2y ago
> Who will buy the phones when no one is paid to produce them? The cars? The food and the clothes?
Other wealthy people. I knew someone in the yacht-building business who would say "If you want a business that will last, sell to rich people--they're the ones who have money." We are very quickly moving towards a world where the economic activity (earning + spending + producing) of the median person is insignificant next to the activity of the very rich. There are individuals who have more wealth than the GDP of entire countries.
We're bifurcating into a society like the movie Elysium: A relatively small number of wealthy people who matter to the economy, and a huge number scraping by day to day whose economic activity amounts to a rounding error in the grand scheme of things.
- netsharc 2y agoThe Uberfication of the workforce is incredible to see: you work when the algorithms tell you there's work, you'll get paid what it wants to pay you. Cheap transport, cheap postage, cheap delivery of foods...
- hangsi 2y agoTell that to the Pierce-Arrow company: makers of the first official cars for the white house, but they didn't survive cash flow problems from the great depression. Meanwhile, Ford survives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierce-Arrow_Motor_Car_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierce-Arrow_Motor_Car_Company
- atrus 2y agoBut the wealthy don't spend their money. A billionaire doesn't spend more money than a million people on...anything probably.
- hsuduebc2 2y agoWealthy people would buy hundreds of millions of different phones? I strongly doubt it. Luxurious electronics for very rich people is usually something like iphone with diamonds covered back. This solves nothing and creates zero innovations.
- onemoresoop 2y agoMaybe they’ll subsidise them so they can monitor us 24/7/365
- dgfitz 2y agoHave you ever read _Atlas Shrugged_? When I read comments like yours, my head goes there.
- mitthrowaway2 2y agoI have read Atlas Shrugged, but I'm not sure how to interpret your comment.
- dgfitz 2y agoI was referring to this part: > A relatively small number of wealthy people who matter to the economy, and a huge number scraping by day to day whose economic activity amounts to a rounding error in the grand scheme of things.
- themaninthedark 2y agoIf I was running a busniess, all tings being equal, I would rather sell 1,000 units at $100 than 10 units at $10,000. The more customers I have, the less risk there is if I lose a customer. The less I have to bow to my customers whims. If one of the 10 people ask me to hire their cousin, I might have to do that. If one of the 1,000 people ask me to do so, probably not.
- analog31 2y agoAs it stands right now, the common people having phones is what justifies investment in the cellular infrastructure. Without that investment, wealthy people can have plenty of phones but no service.
- s1artibartfast 2y agoWealth =/= spending, and definitely doesn't equal consumption. Elon Musk might have more wealth than 1,000,000 US households, but he doesnt eat 3 million meals a day, drive a million cars, or sleep in a million houses. I would be very interested in seeing the breakdown of consumption instead of wealth, as competition for goods and services produced is where disparity has tangible impact. However, the productivity of workers in relation to capital is a valid concern for their ability claim the goods produced.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- krohling 2y agoIs it realistic to think that the poors will start their own economy servicing each other? I'm sure there would be chaos and violence for a period but eventually it seems like the path upward would be a whole new economic system for that 98%. This system could even make use of the automation offered by AI.