Poorly run teams are still fully staffed.
Should Billionaires Exist?
- Thread starter rapbeats
- Start date
88m3
Fast Money & Foreign Objects
I don't think they should exist. I'm not sure how you get rid of them though without a pretty huge shakeup... even if the US found a way there's no guarantee it would happen elsewhere.
Last edited:
endorsements nullify the cap so that’s not a good comparison. players have the opportunity to make more then their league contract.
A wealth cap will cause billionaires to hide money, leave or stop doing business. it provides no incentive to behave ethically
I dont like the power of billionaires and think generational wealth should be destroyed but having some ultra wealthy makes economic sense in the United States. I rather more taxes than a cap.
You are paid at the cost of your replacement not for what you produce. If people got paid for what they produced instead of making a profit then most business wouldnt make sense. Why take a risk with no reward.
I have worked multiple minimum wage jobs. I had a choice between 0$ or minimum wage.
*we should raise the minimum wage and taxes but marxist overplay exploitation and frame money as some fixed thing
You are paid at the cost of your replacement not for what you produce. If people got paid for what they produced instead of making a profit then most business wouldnt make sense. Why take a risk with no reward.
I have worked multiple minimum wage jobs. I had a choice between 0$ or minimum wage.
*we should raise the minimum wage and taxes but marxist overplay exploitation and frame money as some fixed thing
"Billionaire" is arbitrary
Im theoretically ok with trillionaires if theyve been taxed correctly and other people also benefit from their money making
Im theoretically ok with trillionaires if theyve been taxed correctly and other people also benefit from their money making
Breh, PLEASE stop repeating platitudes and start actually trying to defend them.the reason you're having a hard time is cause you and I dont see money the same way
money is NOT a store of value. It is a MEASURE of value. Like the meter, gram or pound.
When Suzy goes to the bank in reality, she actually has to make a strong argument that the money that the bank gives her is going to be paid back via the scheme (Bullshyt Lemonade LLC) presented to them.
They will only give the money to Suzy if not only is that good but herself and her company has a strong credit history.
Banks are hte only ones that receive money from the Federal Reserve (printing money) because they have done the necessary things as businesses to qualify as banks (IE they need to bring their own money, assets and investors to the table as collateral with the US Government)
What you think is value is completely bs. The work is not valuable AT ALL. The finished product is. Noone gives a fukk that someone bought feed stocks to mold cups, they dont care that the co-packer operates with el salvadoran slave labor, or are awares to what Bullshyt Lemonade does behind the scenes.
They just care about their cup of lemonade.
Ultimately every business is putting the needs of consumer first. The minute they stop doing that is the minute they stop making money
Instead of demanding that a company gives you X to be a part of THEIR company, create your own and do it better and earn money yourself
Your claim that "money is not a store of value" is a ridiculous fringe claim used to justify certain platitudes of wealth-owner friendly capitalism. That money is a store of value is obvious and generally accepted by society and economists alike.
Your claim that nothing other than the final cup of lemonade is valuable is also completely false. In a fair economy all of those components - the land, the trees, the lemons, the laborers - are seen as valuable and are competed for by people willing to pay money for them. If no one considers the laborers' work crushing lemons to be valuable, then someone else will grab that value and have the laborer do something. ALL of those things are valuable. To reduce value to "only what the end-use customer pays for" is arbitrary bs and you haven't defended that anywhere.
With everything you said about the relationship between the Fed and banks, you continue to explain WHAT is happening but you are failing to defend WHY that status quo should be supported. That pathway from the Fed to the banks to the borrower has several major failings that are currently destroying the world.
1. Rent-seekers, including the banks, bonds traders, and others in the finance industry, continue to skim enormous wealth off of that system without adding value. As I pointed out before, the largest growth in wealth and proportion of the economy in recent years has been in the finance sector. All of society pays for their greed.
2. By tying all money printing to loans at positive interest, you ensure extreme motivation for the economy to force growth, which encourages the unsustainable exploitation of all resources and extreme competition leading to lack of trust between actors. A large number of the negative effects of the current economy can be traced back directly to that foundation.
Stop repeating the mantras of your teachers like a cult member. Start considering whether those mantras are actually defensible, and explore the alternatives.
If you look back at my previous comments, "arbitrarily capping pay" has nothing to do with anything I've said. There are more organic ways to improve the system which will by natural effect likely also eliminate billionaries. You just assumed that I was going to propose something arbitrary.
dora_da_destroyer
Master Baker
Your post didn’t get into ways to improve the system, you wanted to get rid of billionaires and went into all the reasons they’re big bad scary people
Better taxation and redistribution is all that's needed.
Global poverty it at its lowest point in history and there are more billionaires than ever before, and the countries with the most billionaires, enjoy the highest standards of living.
This fixed pie, billionaire vampire nonsense needs to go away, as well as this pontifical idea that we can accurately judge someone's value from the outside looking in.
Global poverty it at its lowest point in history and there are more billionaires than ever before, and the countries with the most billionaires, enjoy the highest standards of living.
This fixed pie, billionaire vampire nonsense needs to go away, as well as this pontifical idea that we can accurately judge someone's value from the outside looking in.
the only person who determines value is the customer/consumer
you're acting as if everyone is entitled to everything. You just said in a "fair" economy everyone gets to buy...that IS how it is
and you have the value chain backwards. Time isn't peddled MONEY is. HR for companies dont go out begging for peoples time. They post a position and attach a compensation to it and people flock to it.
you keep saying shyt like status quo but this is 10000s of years in the making. If you made something yourself, and someone else arbitrarily told you what your work was worth you would not be happy about it. You would likely tell them my work is worth what my customers will pay me. Otherwise you're a simp
money IS NOT A store of value. It has not been since the removal of gold backing. It is a debt note that is legal tender for purchases and it says that shyt on the paper. It may as well say I OWE YOU.
sadly i am not repeating what my teachers taught me at all. I had two kinds of teachers. Those who were workers and losers and those who made money and came back to teach because they were bored.
The ones who understood what it took to make money flourished and those tied to the university for their pay checks lamented capitalism.
furthermore @Rhakim
if the world currencies went back in time and started backing the currency with gold, it would actually encourage hoarding of the currency to the likes in which people here would rather believe
in reality, by backing the currency with public sentiment as it is now it can be printed endlessly as long as public sentiment is maintained (moreover, as long as the major front line producers exchange their goods for that currency)
The system as it is allows the easiest and most seamless transfer of value the world has ever seen.
If you were an english citizen in the height of their empire you would struggle to accumulate shillings because of the fact that the shillings themselves were worth more than what you'd spend them on
or a gold digger who gets fleeced on exchange rate when he offers an in a nugget in exchange for a years boarding. The nugget of gold can be spent with another party that values it more.
FIAT currency eliminates this dynamic and its a beneficial one albeit not obvious unless you know the history of currency.
if the world currencies went back in time and started backing the currency with gold, it would actually encourage hoarding of the currency to the likes in which people here would rather believe
in reality, by backing the currency with public sentiment as it is now it can be printed endlessly as long as public sentiment is maintained (moreover, as long as the major front line producers exchange their goods for that currency)
The system as it is allows the easiest and most seamless transfer of value the world has ever seen.
If you were an english citizen in the height of their empire you would struggle to accumulate shillings because of the fact that the shillings themselves were worth more than what you'd spend them on
or a gold digger who gets fleeced on exchange rate when he offers an in a nugget in exchange for a years boarding. The nugget of gold can be spent with another party that values it more.
FIAT currency eliminates this dynamic and its a beneficial one albeit not obvious unless you know the history of currency.
I have more than one comment in this thread. There are several potential solutions, a number of which I name-dropped in other comments. Nowhere did I suggest a purge.
Poverty is "low" only when measured poorly. There are more people living in slums than ever before, but they are considered "not in poverty" if they make a certain daily wage greater than what they were making as rural farmers, even if in the process they've lost their ancestral land and are forced to spend their wages on rent, more expensive perishable goods, and other generally higher living costs while having smaller homes, less land, worse air, and generally a lower self-reported quality of life than they did when they were "in poverty".
And that's before you get to the fact that consumption is vastly unsustainable and those billionaires are making much of their money converting land, forests, soil, fisheries, clean air, clean water, etc. into cash, to the detriment of the environment in general and the human species in particular.
i think you guys are missing the point. its not a cap that says you cant make a billi. its a hard tax to say if you hit this threshold, 100% of your earnings will go to taxes. because the reality is, at that point you need to give up some of that doe. you have more than you will ever be able to spend wisely as one individual.
again, proper taxation and redistribution is what will stop billionaires from becoming billionaires. thats the part you dont get.
You can't sustain this kind of Pizza. where the pizza gets larger and larger the slices shared become less shared, yes that one slice the rest of us still have is larger than it was before. but its not large enough to become 4 slices on a large size pizza with 12 slices.Its more like a slice and a half size slice. You keep gong this route and you will have pitch forks and people in the streets. People are not going to keep watching you drive around in million dollar cars while they're sleeping in tents and in their cars while they are still going to work everyday to make you even richer.
