47 Comments

I would disagree. While people who work hard deserve a reward, a lot of the ultra-rich have more money than they could spend in a lifetime. The issue is not that they are making money; the issue is that that money is no longer circulating.

Expand full comment

A couple of points.

Most of wealth people claim is "tied up" is not cash sitting in a bank account. It is equity in stock, which is creating jobs in the market where the cash is in circulation. It is also generating tax revenue. Elon Musk's fortune is not cash, it is the value of his stock in companies which create money.

Secondly, there is no fixed amount of wealth for anyone to hoard. Wealth is CREATED every day. When a company borrows money for a venture, money is printed and given to the company with the expectation that the company will profit enough to repay the loan and create additional wealth. That is the essence of capitalism.

I used in the OP the "Dawn of Man" film segment to illustrate the creation of wealth which did not exist before. The clip can be considered as the first time man created wealth, and we have been expanding wealth ever since then.

This early man made the lives of his tribe better by coming up with an idea first. Then he risked his life proving his concept. His idea worked and the lives of his family, his tribe and the entire human race were improved. He likely became the king of his tribe and his capital gain was the respect and admiratiin of his tribe.

You can easily extend this concept to Elon Musk or any great capitalist who has an idea, assumes the risk of failure and improves the lives of everyone. He is rightfully rewarded for benefitting society. Same can be said for Gates, Zuckerberg, Bezos, etc.

Further comment is welcomed and invited.

Thank you for participating!

Expand full comment

Again, I have to respectfully disagree.

Look at what Elon Musk did at Twitter: he fired half the employees there, which is just a classic “cut in expenses” like what they did back during the Great Depression.

Secondly, you say that Elon Musk’s wealth is mostly in his stocks. I supposed this is true, but the stock market has been shown to be basically an institution for legalized gambling as it becomes more and more removed from the actual economy in a cycle of boom and bust that is often abused by the rich, like Elon Musk.

Thirdly, you seem to equate Elon Musk and Bill Gates with humanity’s first inventor. Why? What have any of them contributed to society? Often their wealth comes from other people’s ideas, and they just make money because they are better at managing it.

I know that money is supposedly a “reward” for hard work, but then nurses and garbage disposal workers would be rich. They work exceptionally hard to keep us healthy and keep our neighborhoods clean, and yet many live in poverty.

Lastly, Elon Musk’s recent abuse of cryptocurrency and using Bitcoin buybacks has not exactly shown him to be a scrupulous person.

Yes, we should reward people for their ideas. But I don’t think we can just say, “Well, if he has capital then he must be smart!”

Feel free to debate what I just said, and apologies in advance for any grammatical errors or typos.

Expand full comment

Thirdly,

If you cannot see what these people have contributed then you are being intentionally blind.

Every inventor builds his invention using past innovations.

Are you familiar with the expression "on the shoulders of giants"?

What most common folks (including myself) lack is the desire and willingness to risk it all with our ideas. We prefer to work for a safe and regular income. Many people today work regular jobs for security, and also pursue "side gigs" in their spare time. Some have become wealthy doing so. No one is "locked out" as you seem to imply. Most of us simply have other priorities.

It takes a special kind of obsession to follow through and make an idea actually happen. Some have it and some don't. To envy those who do is to fall victim to one of the seven deadly sins. Not recommended. It only harms yourself.

Expand full comment

“Every inventor builds his invention using past innovations.”

Sorry, but did I ever contradict this? Of course you need to build your idea off of someone else’s ideas. I’m saying that they are profiting money from other people’s ideas rather than their own.

“It takes a special kind of obsession to follow through and make an idea actually happen. Some have it and some don't. To envy those who do is to fall victim to one of the seven deadly sins. Not recommended. It only harms yourself.”

I agree. But I do not think Elon Musk or Bill Gates are that sort of people.

Why do you say that I am envious, too? Do you think that I can’t have opinions differing from your own unless I have some weird motivation behind it?

Expand full comment

Yes, Elon Musk, Gates and almost every wealthy person are especially driven people. Workaholics and strongly devoted to the entities they create. Their businesses are protected and nurtured like their children.

I've been around long enough to observe that hatred of the rich is primarily driven by envy. That is my opinion.

Expand full comment

I'm not sure what your complaint is in the second paragraph. Musks wealth is primarily the equity (stock) that he owns in his company. This is how anyone with a business is rewarded for creating a product or service which serves humanity. Like the Hominid in the video, he deserves the fruits of his labor. He provides a product which makes our lives better and we show our gratitude by sending monet.

Is the market gambling? I suppose you can call it gambling, but it is not random chance. If you are the CEO you have a lot of control over the success or failure of a company. To a lesser degree, employees also have some control. Musk offers stock options to employees as an incentive for them to do good work. This is common in most companies.

If you are an outside investor, it is a bit more risky because you have little control over the direction of the company. You are basically relying on faith that the management will grow the company and increase the value of your stock. That's the simple cliff's notes description of the marker.

I'm not sure why you object to the market. Perhaps it is because there have been folks who are criminal and rob people, like Bernie Madoff or Enron. Both of these examples were cases of people buying into a scheme which was too good to be true. Their greed replaced common sense and they paid the price. There is an old adage about that. If it sounds too good to be true, then it probably is.

This is no reason to get rid of the stock market. We punish the criminals, but not throw out the baby with the bath water.

Expand full comment

I am not opposed to the market. I am opposed to how it functions. The endless cycle of boom and bust, of bubbles and recessions needs to end. Speculation is not how the value of a stock should be viewed. The value of a stock should be what that person’s share of the company is worth. When the bubble inevitably pops, only the richest stay afloat.

Expand full comment

You are not getting this yet. Take some time to think about it more. The value of a company is not fixed. It can change in an instant with one event.

Someone trading in futures could bet that Phizer would have the best covid vaccine and make lots of money bidding up Pfizer stock.

Then, the next day a prominent lawyer begins advertising worldwide about his filing at the Hague of a global class action suit against Pfizer for it's role in creating the covid virus in Wuhan. What would be the effect on a share of Pfizer? Is this something that a person investing in futures could anticipate and make some money trading in futures (shorting pfizer)?

Who is harmed by this futures trading?

Expand full comment

You say that I am not getting what you are saying: but I perfectly understand much of what you say. What exactly am I not getting?

Expand full comment

One item at a time.

Elon Musk fired many Twitter employees when he took over. This is very common in any takeover. There are likely parties loyal to their former owner who might be inclined to resist change because some of those policies came from those employees. Some Twitter employees had roots in the intelligence community and they might work to undermine the goal of exposing the government role in media censorship. In case you are not aware, making Twitter a profitable business was not the primary reason that Musk bought Twitter.

That being said, cutting fat was necessary in order to help make the company healthier. It was bleeding money and many employees simply were not working very hard, if at all. If the company had gone bankrupt then no one would have a job. This is a very natural thing. It happens in the wild as well. The strong survive and the weak perish. It is not a happy day for the weak, but it is good for the whole of the species (or company in this case). Also, the lazy employees learn something about the fruits of our labor. Bad seeds yield bitter fruit. They will work harder in their next job.

Expand full comment

Weren’t working hard? How? One of the most productive managers was fired by Musk.

Expand full comment

He may have been a deep state embed. I'm not sure you understand the big picture. I didn't at first and thought he was nuts buying Twitter. Method in his madness it seems and I am once again amazed by his genius and courage. Very risky business.

Expand full comment

I’m confused. If you understand the big picture, can you explain it?

Expand full comment

I have an appointment. I'll reply tonight.

Expand full comment

Ok.

Expand full comment

I would also like to note Bill Gates’ refusal to waive the patents for the COVID vaccine, which could have saved many lives in poorer nations. Is this something a moral person would do? No. It seems more like someone just wanting to get the most money out of a product, rather than trying to serve the “greater good.”

Expand full comment

I'm no fan of Bill Gates either. That is no reason to throw out the baby with the bath water. Capitalism is good, some people are bad, rich and poor.

Expand full comment

Here’s the thing though. Capitalism’s industrial power is unmatched, I would say — maybe China could surpass the US there, but that’s not what I want to discuss.

The lengths that capitalism goes to to “maximize profits” can often be quite harmful, such as monopolization. When the only motivation is money, then unscrupulous people will cheat other people out of theirs.

While the “free market” is an interesting idea, it is often used as an excuse to ignore safety regulations. Milton Friedman once said that doctor’s licenses shouldn’t exist, because the patients would be able to determine if people started complaining about him, because the “free market” would decide. (Which, I think, is crazy).

Sorry for the long tangent, but I find this topic very interesting.

Expand full comment

Can you give me an example of a monopoly today? We do have antitrust regulations to prevent them.

There will always be unscrupulous people in this world. Same goes for communist or socialist societies. That is not a logical reason for abandoning capitalism.

The free market is much more than an interesting idea. It's been the preferred method of societies for thousands of years. The alternative is a captured market which no one wants.

A doctor is motivated to do good work. If he doesn't the market (aka peer pressure). If he is a bad doctor, word gets out and he loses patients.

Expand full comment

An example of a monopoly: McDonald’s, Coca Cola, Amazon, Apple.

About the whole thing with the doctor, why not just prevent that doctor from getting patients? If that doctor is a surgeon, what about the people who were injured because of those surgeries? There is no trust between doctor and patient. If you’re patient #1, you can’t be sure that you’re doctor is trained and will do their best to save your life.

Expand full comment

Oh, sorry — I forgot to add that I don’t think capitalism should be abandoned. There are some things to be admired about it, but the system itself is open for exploitation by the wealthiest class, which is a big problem.

Expand full comment

What I’m describing might actually be more of an oligopoly, now that I think about it.

Expand full comment

I know we have anti-trust laws, but they’re often weak and unenforced. Uber got big because it bypassed anti-trust laws by putting taxi companies out of business with their low prices, and then raising them once the competition was eliminated.

Expand full comment

None of those companies are monopolies. They all have competitors.

A surgeon is motivated to avoid injuring patients. If they make too many mistakes they cannot get malpractice insurance. Lawsuits are a good incentive to stay atop your game in any profession.

Surgery is always risky. Every body is unique and there will always be those who will die or be injured. Every patient is advised of the risks (except for the covid vaccines, which doctors like mine refused to administer). Every patient can either accept the risk or refuse the treatment.

Life is full of risk, even if you stay in bed all day. There are no guarantees you or I will be here tomorrow. That is why one should make the most of every day, as if it were your last.

Expand full comment

1. I correct myself. They are not monopolies, they are oligopolies.

2. Surgery always comes with risk. But I don’t want some random fool with a knife doing my surgery. At least with a doctor’s license, the chance of success increases. It’s like saying that we shouldn’t test if bridges are safe, because if the bridge keeps collapsing people will stop crossing it. I’m sorry, but that’s flawed logic.

Let’s continue this discussion tomorrow.

Expand full comment

This sounds like "let us know praise the billionaires" as the "captains of industry" were lauded in the 1920s. Those who disagree are merely envious.

Expand full comment

I'm not suggesting we idolize them either.

It's more a counterpoint to the very popular habit of demonizing the rich.

We need rich, middle class, and even paupers. A symbiosis of sorts.

Expand full comment