At what point do we start to question . . . . . maybe someone has too much money? Is it all about the POWER money gives someone? The Ability to do what ever you want with fewer consequences Is it about the ability to sh*t on others more than others can sh*t on you Does the meme encapsulate our whole mentality about the hierarchical nature of our society? I'm not necessarily asking to limit anyone's money but I am questioning . . . .why. What does another 10 . . .20 . . .100 .. . .400 billion dollars do for someone like Elon Musk? What could he do with it . .. that he cannot already do at his current level? What's the point of such gross amassment of money? Rocket River I'm curious . . .seriously.
In before someone says, "just a little bit more." Wealth is about power relative to other people. A billionaire from the ancient world could swap places with an American blue collar worker today and get an apartment with heating and AC, an iPhone with the internet, a car, and all the other basic amenities we have that would be transformative millennia ago. But he wouldn't have servants or power or influence or respect. He wouldn't have control of his own time but would have to subordinate himself to others for these amenities he enjoys. They aren't making that trade for some a/c and an iPhone. America's worker productivity is ~10x what it was a century ago. We produce ten times as much wealth per person. But, the relative position of the average worker hasn't improved 10x, nor are we holding steady with only 10% of the former worker participation. Instead, most of that extra wealth is being captured by the owners of capital. Regular joe shareholders get some of that in their 401(k)s, but the top 1% or 0.1%, who have strong bargaining positions on the distribution of wealth, are capturing an outsized share of that excess wealth as an inevitable result of this negotiation in a capitalist economy. They don't need it, of course, but any other result would be irrational given the economic algorithm we run. And recent technological developments in automation only exacerbate outcomes by further strengthening the hand of capital against the bargaining power of labor. I think the growing economic disparity is one of the biggest problems we face. In some ways, MAGA is one symptom, though it is like an inflammation that makes healing harder. The maneuvers I've seen to address some of the problems seem slapdash and don't actually really get at the root of it. Democrats would just tax them more to take away the excess wealth, but then it still doesn't really go to the people but just to their government. Republicans might have the ultra-rich give to charity, but then the people are taking handouts instead of earning their wealth. Trumpers would turn the people outward and tell them to take their wealth from foreigners and leave the billionaires alone; that obviously is not a model that can still work if applied globally and denies the fundamental problem of a system solving the wealth distribution question always with the same answer of giving it to those who have the most. We need to address the algorithm. There is a dynamic negotiation over how much of the wealth we generate goes to capital and how much to labor, and the answer is determined by their relative bargaining power. Labor's bargaining power is very weak, and capital's is very strong. Communism's answer of taking capital's position didn't do anything for labor, but just swapped the counterparty. Socialism has had more success, but it's a muddy mess with plenty of injustices all its own. The power of capital is very hard to combat because it can switch countries when it doesn't like your rules. It can switch currencies or go crypto. It can corrupt politicians and hire mercenaries. I honestly don't know any approach I have any confidence in to reduce the power of capital owners. I just think we should because we have a lot of human flourishing that is locked up in their vaults.
The issue is that the average worker in terms of income still makes enough to live comfortably and have extra spending. Education and housing costs are starting to eat at the average worker and when it becomes too much maybe we will start to see some change in those algorithms but today there still isn't much incentive from the middle class
This thread is just really about jealousy, hypocrisy , and someone who didn't buy TSLA stock a few years ago when it was cheap. @AroundTheWorld @RB713 @Os Trigonum @basso I'm waiting for the "TILMAN IS POOR" crowd to complain about the Rockets
I don't know why you quoted me to state what you posted. I don't like all of Rocket River's threads but he clearly states that he doesn't have a problem with very wealthy people being very wealthy and I clearly states average Americans are doing fine in response to JuanValsez's post
There was a shot at Elon for being the world’s richest person Elon has been successful at era changing technology that changed the world @basso @Salvy @RB713 The people hate Howard Hughes but the airline industry and Las Vegas would not be here without him He bought out the entire mafia @AroundTheWorld Bobby brown said this , I made this money you didn’t you know who actually does not work and makes more money ? The king of Saudi Arabia
Bottom to top of people, wealth gets more parabolic as you go up Plebs: 96.7% Hard working, made out ok: 2% C-suite assholes: .5% Trust fund babies: .5% 9 figure rich: .2% Truly wealthy, buy politicians: .1% Illuminati, Royals: .000001%
How do you stop people from becoming billionaires? Money drives innovation. As much as some dislike Musk now he has improved the world. He didn't invent electric cars but he has driven more to compete with him Capitalism drives pharmaceutical companies and oil. companies. We take the good with the bad at every level of society, the very poorest to the very richest
Regardless there will always be ultra rich people. There were when the first rich Rockefeller made his first million and when Gates made his
