“Billionaires” existed before capitalism, they were just called “Kings” or “Lords” or “Emperors” or “High Priests” or whatever.
The difference is that with capitalism at least they’re producing something. Often they become billionaires because the regulations break down and they become monopolists. But, they’re still producing something and selling it to someone.
“Billionaires” of the past were rich because they won the parental lottery and inherited vast amounts of land, and the people that worked that land. Or, occasionally, because they won a war against someone else who held land and now owned the people that other “billionaire” used to own.
I’m not saying capitalism is a great system. But, it didn’t create wealth disparity. That has existed since even before agriculture. So, getting rid of capitalism isn’t going to get rid of billionaires because they’re a problem in every other system. In theory, you might not have billionaires under communism, but communism in theory doesn’t seem to work. In practice, it results in billionaires too. In theory capitalism shouldn’t have billionaires either because the government was supposed to regulate businesses to force them to continue to compete. But, wealth disparity is something that no political system has ever managed to actually get rid of.
There’s wealth disparity and then there’s the wealth chasm of today, the disparity has grown so much in the last couple of decades beyond anything in human history.
The only reason it can is because of capitalism (neoliberalism, late stage capitalism).
The system incentivises and rewards the horrific behaviour that results in the disparity.
Also, pray tell, what are inheritocrats who made all their non-inherited money through stock markets producing?
As far as I can see, they’re not producing anything, but are profiting off the backs of, and at the expense of, those that are producing the value.
There’s wealth disparity and then there’s the wealth chasm of today,
You think the chasm today is as big as the gap between Augustus Caesar and a slave in Rome, or even a Roman plebian? Augustus Caesar’s wealth is estimated at around $5 trillion in today’s money.
The only way in which capitalism is responsible for wealth gaps is that it is tied to technological developments. In the modern world technology allows 1 farmer to feed hundreds of people. One century ago (also under capitalism) it was only about 4 people. More people who aren’t farming means more labour to allocate to other things, which means more wealth can be concentrated at the top.
We don’t have to totally change the system. They can keep making billions of dollars, we can just tax 99% of it. Maybe they’ll pay their employees more, if they know it’s only going to get taxed away anyhow. And if they don’t, well just take it from them.
Yes this is the answer. No single persons should have this much money. Instead collectives like governments, corps and holdings should have the money. By doing so the governments are also able to control money flow and restrict unethical use cases.
But this would require governments working for the people, people voting parties that are doing stuff for them and not for corruption.
Also media outlets need a proper source of independent income to that opinion is not monopolized, which is the hardest in my opinion, because how most outlets are making money is by writing emotional articles so that they are clicked.
My issue is when these people get so much money that they can start cutting personal deals with other nations that aren’t in alignment with their own nation’s values.
And what happens when a few trillionaires decide to form an alliance and create their own army, conquer territory, and create their own Libertarian Dream/Nightmare?
Billionaires are the result of Capitalism, change the system, no more parasitic billionaires. Also chop off their heads.
“Billionaires” existed before capitalism, they were just called “Kings” or “Lords” or “Emperors” or “High Priests” or whatever.
The difference is that with capitalism at least they’re producing something. Often they become billionaires because the regulations break down and they become monopolists. But, they’re still producing something and selling it to someone.
“Billionaires” of the past were rich because they won the parental lottery and inherited vast amounts of land, and the people that worked that land. Or, occasionally, because they won a war against someone else who held land and now owned the people that other “billionaire” used to own.
I’m not saying capitalism is a great system. But, it didn’t create wealth disparity. That has existed since even before agriculture. So, getting rid of capitalism isn’t going to get rid of billionaires because they’re a problem in every other system. In theory, you might not have billionaires under communism, but communism in theory doesn’t seem to work. In practice, it results in billionaires too. In theory capitalism shouldn’t have billionaires either because the government was supposed to regulate businesses to force them to continue to compete. But, wealth disparity is something that no political system has ever managed to actually get rid of.
There’s wealth disparity and then there’s the wealth chasm of today, the disparity has grown so much in the last couple of decades beyond anything in human history.
The only reason it can is because of capitalism (neoliberalism, late stage capitalism).
The system incentivises and rewards the horrific behaviour that results in the disparity.
Also, pray tell, what are inheritocrats who made all their non-inherited money through stock markets producing?
As far as I can see, they’re not producing anything, but are profiting off the backs of, and at the expense of, those that are producing the value.
You think the chasm today is as big as the gap between Augustus Caesar and a slave in Rome, or even a Roman plebian? Augustus Caesar’s wealth is estimated at around $5 trillion in today’s money.
The only way in which capitalism is responsible for wealth gaps is that it is tied to technological developments. In the modern world technology allows 1 farmer to feed hundreds of people. One century ago (also under capitalism) it was only about 4 people. More people who aren’t farming means more labour to allocate to other things, which means more wealth can be concentrated at the top.
We don’t have to totally change the system. They can keep making billions of dollars, we can just tax 99% of it. Maybe they’ll pay their employees more, if they know it’s only going to get taxed away anyhow. And if they don’t, well just take it from them.
Yes this is the answer. No single persons should have this much money. Instead collectives like governments, corps and holdings should have the money. By doing so the governments are also able to control money flow and restrict unethical use cases.
But this would require governments working for the people, people voting parties that are doing stuff for them and not for corruption. Also media outlets need a proper source of independent income to that opinion is not monopolized, which is the hardest in my opinion, because how most outlets are making money is by writing emotional articles so that they are clicked.
My issue is when these people get so much money that they can start cutting personal deals with other nations that aren’t in alignment with their own nation’s values.
And what happens when a few trillionaires decide to form an alliance and create their own army, conquer territory, and create their own Libertarian Dream/Nightmare?
That’s where you lose. Keep it vague like “eat the rich”
But I’m not into vore.
The Fargo approach, then. Wood chipper.
So who runs shit in utopia?
Anyone but the ones doing it for profit.
I’d be up for a technocratie
And you think somehow the ones running it aren’t going to concentrate wealth and power for themselves?
Godlike AIs of course.
A bunch of nerds who only cared about perfection.
That way the idea can’t be corrupted cause a nerd’s obsession is more powerful than anything.
But what is perfection?
System version 1.7.586 is coming out tomorrow.
Still better than the bs we are all running now.
That’s basically how the bureaucratic class aka. the states middle management works.
we the people
Me, of course _
autonomous collective
seriously though, are you saying capitalism is the best humans can ever have?