🇳🇱
Just a reminder, wealth is **not** a zero sum game. If it were we would still be living in caves.
@freemo
Well, the total amount grows over time, but slowly. If this is addressing wealth disparity, that is indeed a zero-sum game at any moment in time. The more that billionaires have, the less the rest of us do.
I haven't really heard much angst about people with a million or three, though. The outrage tends to be directed at those with outsized wealth, and the outsized control that goes with it.
@IAmErik No the idea that wealth grows slowly is a huge fallacy.. you are probably thinking of money supply, not wealth. Wealth actually grows quite quickly, it can also be destroyed quickly.
The logic applyes whether you have a million or a trillion, no matter how much someone has is never a reason for outrage. What a person does with their money is all that matter, some create tons of wealth, some destroy wealth, and others give to charity... most do some sort of combination of the three.
Ahhh well then I see where your understanding fails here:
> The money supply and one person’s share of it determine economic power.
Nope Wealth is not Money Supply. I can have 0 dollars and a huge pile of gold or other valuable goods and I'd still have a lot of wealth.
You cant begin to really approach what is being said here until you first understand what wealth is, and it is NOT the money supply.
@freemo
Hah, just realized I misquoted the image in your OP. Sorry. Someone else in this thread said, "millionaires".
@freemo
The money supply and one person's share of it determine economic power. What I'm trying to say is:
1. There isn't much outrage over people with millionaire-level wealth, so the image on your post is a straw-man.
2. The relative size of individuals' assets does have an impact on their well-being.