Should Billionaires Exist?

[Dans La Lune]

Should an economy be structured so that billionaires exist while people live on the street and can't afford healthcare? And no matter what anyone says, an economy that allows billionaires is structured that way. The free market is a myth. There is only a government that serves the rich and facilitates the accumulation of wealth and power to this degree.

 

[Questerr]

Absolutely not.

They are human dragons sitting on massive piles of gold.

 

[roberthughey]

Should an economy be structured so that billionaires exist while people live on the street and can't afford healthcare? And no matter what anyone says, an economy that allows billionaires is structured that way. The free market is a myth. There is only a government that serves the rich and facilitates the accumulation of wealth and power to this degree.

I'll take a few billionaires over your socialism.

 

[Questerr]

I'll take a few billionaires over your socialism.

And billionaires thank you for your service. They will still kill you if it means one extra dollar in profits.

 

[Dans La Lune]

Absolutely not.

They are human dragons sitting on massive piles of gold.

I always thought Tolkien-style dragons were a deliberate critique of greed and capitalism. The more you have, the more you want, such that it's an actual mental illness ('dragon sickness'). Dragons are enormously powerful, but are ultimately useless because they just sit on the treasure while occasionally inflicting malevolence to benefit their hoard.

 

[Questerr]

I always thought Tolkien-style dragons were a deliberate critique of greed and capitalism. The more you have, the more you want, such that it's an actual mental illness ('dragon sickness'). Dragons are enormously powerful, but are ultimately useless because they just sit on the treasure while occasionally inflicting malevolence to benefit their hoard.

Tolkien didn’t invent the trope. Norse mythology did. Fafnir is the archetype of the gold hoarding dragon.

 

[coyote505]

Should the Internet exist? How about the telephone? Autos? Electricity?

Most of these things were developed by people who had a secret desire to be Billionaires.

 

[Questerr]

Should the Internet exist? How about the telephone? Autos? Electricity?

Most of these things were developed by people who had a secret desire to be Billionaires.

The Internet was developed by the government. Electricity was the work of the Royal Society, developed for purely scientific reasons. Bell was again a scientist first and even after patenting the telephone never even came close to being a billionaire adjusted for inflation.

 

[Gozaburo]

Should an economy be structured so that billionaires exist while people live on the street and can't afford healthcare? And no matter what anyone says, an economy that allows billionaires is structured that way. The free market is a myth. There is only a government that serves the rich and facilitates the accumulation of wealth and power to this degree.

I'm not sure if billionaires should exist, but there is something deeply ironic about Bill Burr - a wealthy millionaire - giving a vaguely socialist critique of the capitalist given that his massive fortune is thanks to bourgeoise humor.

 

[Questerr]

I'm not sure if billionaires should exist, but there is something deeply ironic about Bill Burr - a wealthy millionaire - giving a vaguely socialist critique of the capitalist given that his massive fortune is thanks to bourgeoise humor.

As ironic as rich aristocratic planters who owned slaves being opposed to monarchy.

 

[dmpi]

Yes, because it's a necessary byproduct of the capitalistic system. It motivate people to aspire to be all they can be, it concentrates wealth and capital to those best qualified to manage and allocate it and it provides private sector support and expertise to large (potentially risky) tasks the goverment cannot or will not handle.

 

[Gozaburo]

As ironic as rich aristocratic planters who owned slaves being opposed to monarchy.

I'm not sure how that's ironic or related to the subject.

 

[Questerr]

I'm not sure how that's ironic or related to the subject.

It’s pretty ironic to hear aristocrats who own slaves say “this king shouldn’t be ruling over us”.

Yet our country came into existence due to that irony.

 

[Airyaman]

Yes. But I'm a libertarian minded person who doesn't believe we should limit people making money if that is their goal.

 

[Questerr]

Yes, because it's a necessary byproduct of the capitalistic system. It motivate people to aspire to be all they can be, it concentrates wealth and capital to those best qualified to manage and allocate it and it provides private sector supports and expertise to large (potentially risky) tasks the goverment cannot or will not handle.

It isn’t a “necessary byproduct”. Billionaires exist because of exploitation, whether that’s their workers, their consumers, the environment, or usually a combination of all three.

That exploitation is not necessary.

Pray tell, how is MacKenzie Scott “the best qualified to manage and allocate capital”? What did she do to merit being a billionaire?

 

[Noodlegawd]

Should an economy be structured so that billionaires exist while people live on the street and can't afford healthcare? And no matter what anyone says, an economy that allows billionaires is structured that way. The free market is a myth. There is only a government that serves the rich and facilitates the accumulation of wealth and power to this degree.

You have to explain how you propose that billionaires would be prevented from existing. Talking about how "the economy structured" is a copout.

 

[Questerr]

You have to explain how you propose that billionaires would be prevented from existing. Talking about how "the economy structured" is a copout.

Making the exploitation required for them to exist illegal or at least heavily regulated would be a good start.

 

[Noodlegawd]

Absolutely not.

They are human dragons sitting on massive piles of gold.

Feel free to become one of them and then give away your pile.

 

[Noodlegawd]

Making the exploitation required for them to exist illegal or at least heavily regulated would be a good start.

What exploitation? That is just as uselessly vague as "economy is structured...."

 

[Questerr]

Feel free to become one of them and then give away your pile.

Or I could be against their exploitation.

This is like saying to someone opposed to absolute monarchs “why don’t you become a king and then give people more freedoms?”

 

[phoenix2020]

Yes. But I'm a libertarian minded person who doesn't believe we should limit people making money if that is their goal.

This sums up my view. If Person A and Person B both want to make money but Person B happens to be four orders of magnitude more effective at it, I don’t particularly feel that their wings should be clipped.

 

[roberthughey]

And billionaires thank you for your service. They will still kill you if it means one extra dollar in profits.

You want their money and you want to keep yours.

 

[Noodlegawd]

Or I could be against their exploitation.

This is like saying to someone opposed to absolute monarchs “why don’t you become a king and then give people more freedoms?”

Billionaires are not monarchs.

 

[phoenix2020]

Making the exploitation required for them to exist illegal or at least heavily regulated would be a good start.

Which billionaire exploited you, and specifically how did that individual exploit you?

 

[Airyaman]

This sums up my view. If Person A and Person B both want to make money but Person B happens to be four orders of magnitude more effective at it, I don’t particularly feel that their wings should be clipped.

Now if you ask me if billionaires should get super yuge tax cuts while the government raises taxes via tariffs which hurt lower income people the most, I'll say "hell no".