Should Billionaires Exist?

[AliHajiSheik]

Amazon stubbled into cloud computing. They built more datacenter capacity than they needed, and then tried to find a way to monetize it.

Amazon didn't stumble into cloud computing, they created the initial components of their own cloud in 2002 and yes, found a way to monetize and democratize their own solutions. They created a product that generates over $100 billion in sales per year and has over 300 million people worldwide that could spin up their own infrastructure with a few clicks.

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

Wait, you mean we can have high taxes and massive social welfare programs like Sweden does and it won’t result in all capitalists fleeing the country?

Thats just a conservative lie?

Yes it is a conservative lie.

But it will be no easy feat to have high taxes and massive social welfare programs like Sweden does without also having billionaires like Sweden does.

The success of social democracy in Sweden is not in spite of her billionaires, but because of them.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Then we don’t need billionaires.

Whether we need billionaires or not is irrelevant in my view. The problem is the only way to prevent billionaires would be to legally prevent them with government action. I don't believe that would actually prevent them, but rather they would emigrate to other countries with more friendly laws for them. The only result would be U.S. companies owned by billionaires that are neither U.S. citizens or U.S. residents, which by any measure would be worse than them at least being U.S. citizens with a stake in the United States.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Amazon didn't stumble into cloud computing, they created the initial components of their own cloud in 2002 and yes, found a way to monetize and democratize their own solutions. They created a product that generates over $100 billion in sales per year and has over 300 million people worldwide that could spin up their own infrastructure with a few clicks.

They initially stumbled into it though. There is no doubt that they have created a great platform. However, they didn't initially intend to do so.

How Amazon grew an awkward side project into AWS, a behemoth that’s now 4 times bigger than its original shopping business

Over two decades, AWS has become the ultimate case study in corporate innovation.

fortune.com

 

[Lord of Planar]

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.

No matter that system you have, you will have the "haves," and "have nots."

Ever get a job from a poor person?

 

[Cordelier]

No matter that system you have, you will have the "haves," and "have nots."

Ever get a job from a poor person?

I think it's less about the "haves" and "have-nots" than it is about the Middle Class.

The more wealth you concentrate with the "haves", the less there is for the "middle".

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

I think it's less about the "haves" and "have-nots" than it is about the Middle Class.

The more wealth you concentrate with the "haves", the less there is for the "middle".

That is empirically incorrect.

Real median incomes and real median wealth have both historically increased alongside the increased concentration of wealth.

 

[hecatmoggie]

I can't believe the voting

What you the "No" voters are saying is that when someone has more than you do, they shouldn't exist


what in idiot viewpoint IMO

 

[Bullseye]

What if there were not stupid questions?

 

[Decypher]

If the employees of billionaires, such as Amazon or Walmart workers, are so badly paid that they need governmental assistance, then those billionaires are stealing from the taxpayer. Their wealth is stolen.

Of course they also buy politicians to game the system in their favour, and control the information so useful idiots run interference for them.

 

[Bullseye]

Absolutely not.

They are human dragons sitting on massive piles of gold.

 

[Lord of Planar]

I think it's less about the "haves" and "have-nots" than it is about the Middle Class.

The more wealth you concentrate with the "haves", the less there is for the "middle".

Wealth is not a fixed size to be divided. You need to get past that propaganda to start thinking clearly.

 

[Cordelier]

Admittedly, I haven't updated my figures in a while, but when I studied the IRS Statistics of Income, I had the Bottom Half of Taxpayers in 1980 reporting 17.46% of total income. In the last year I did the numbers - 2014 - the same measure had dropped to 12.09%, or by about 30%. If anything, I think the disparity has grown in the last decade.

Median income may be increasing, but fewer people are earning it - as the Middle Class get stretched, people tend to either earn way above it or way below it.

 

[Cordelier]

Wealth is not a fixed size to be divided. You need to get past that propaganda to start thinking clearly.

And you need to get past the propaganda that wealth is limitless. It isn't. There's only a finite supply of it. That's what gives it value.

 

[Goshin]

Most billionaires are such because they founded a company or invented something that large numbers of people found very useful. IE Bill Gates, Elon Musk, etc.

Their billions are chiefly in the form of stock ownership in their companies, not hordes of gold. By means of this stock they control their companies and manage their operations, which again, would not be so profitable if it were not useful to many people.

Their wealth is largely theoretical... since the stock market could crash tomorrow, for all we know. See 1929.

The question isn't so much "should billionaires be allowed to exist" as it is "should we take people's money away from them if we think they have too much.... regardless of how many people use and benefit from their product."

It does get a bit complicated when we consider how much power a billionaire wields in the form of influence and other sorts of clout (like being able to afford as many top-tier lawyers as he wants). A large part of that, though, is the inherent corruption in our system of government where those with power (be it political, economic or otherwise) are less often held fully accountable. Fix the latter and the billionaire will be much less troublesome.

I'd rather require politicians to voluntarily give up their wealth and live on an ordinary person's salary, then watch them like hawks and audit them annually, than to make billionaires impossible.... the latter would greatly impeded progress and innovation.

 

[cpwill]

I can't believe the voting

What you the "No" voters are saying is that when someone has more than you do, they shouldn't exist


what in idiot viewpoint IMO

people have always disliked and found it easy to blame wealthier minorities for their troubles than take on responsibility and focus on their own lives.

 

[Goshin]

Wealth is not a fixed size to be divided. You need to get past that propaganda to start thinking clearly.

Exactly. Very often, billionaires are people who created wealth (and jobs) through innovation of some kind.

 

[cpwill]

If the employees of billionaires, such as Amazon or Walmart workers, are so badly paid that they need governmental assistance, then those billionaires are stealing from the taxpayer.

....I have seen this idea tossed around a couple of times.

But it is precisely backwards: low skill labor openings help to reduce dependency on government services, not increase it. I have never seen anyone actually defend the claim effectively, when asked to walk through the mechanics.

 

[cpwill]

Exactly. Very often, billionaires are people who created wealth (and jobs) through innovation of some kind.

I think I remember reading somewhere in the literature that something like 2-4% of a Billionaire Innovator's wealth-creation actually accrues to them, as opposed to accruing to others.

 

[Cordelier]

people have always disliked and found it easy to blame wealthier minorities for their troubles than take on responsibility and focus on their own lives.

There are factors beyond an individual's control.... like the tax code. It's impossible to make a completely neutral tax code. It's always either going to be more favorable to the wealthy (supply side) or to the middle class (demand side).

 

[bomberfox]

That is empirically incorrect.

Real median incomes and real median wealth have both historically increased alongside the increased concentration of wealth.

Incomes have flatlined since supply side economics came into play.

 

[bomberfox]

The whole problem with billionaires is with wealth comes overwhelming power and status above the law. They also siphon wealth created by workers through sweatshops and violently suppressing labor unions, extorting communities to scrap their public infrastructure to give tax breaks, and attacking public policies designed to create a floor so they can get rich off government contracts. The attack on public institutions so that wealth can be transferred to the already rich and well funded capitalists is an example of class warfare.

 

[Decypher]

....I have seen this idea tossed around a couple of times.

But it is precisely backwards: low skill labor openings help to reduce dependency on government services, not increase it. I have never seen anyone actually defend the claim effectively, when asked to walk through the mechanics.

Which bit do you need explaining? It’s no secret that many employees of these sorts of companies require governmental assistance to augment their low wages. Their labour produces the wealth, but they are not sufficiently compensated for it and instead rely on the taxpayer to survive. Even if your claim about these sorts of jobs reducing government services is true, it still doesn’t mean the wealth isn’t stolen.

 

[Cordelier]

The whole problem with billionaires is with wealth comes overwhelming power and status above the law.

Exactly, like that famous Joseph Keppler cartoon from 1889, "The Bosses of the Senate"



We've got to keep re-learning the lessons of history.

 

[Gatsby]

So Jeff Bezos cooperatively developed Amazon with MacKenzie?

Yes, that is what a marriage is.

I keep bringing it up because people keep claiming billionaires get where they are because of merit.

Most do, including Mackenzie Scott. Some do not, mainly heirs. But the thread question isn't asking about estate taxes, it's asking whether billionaires should exist.