Forums
Guides
Features
Media
Zelda Wiki
Patreon
    Capitalism and Wealth Hoarding
    • Mod Note: Thread split from War Room

      I love how some on the right are acting like "got him!" in regards to Bernie Sanders being a millionaire. Here's the thing the left doesn't hate the rich, they hate rich people who dodge their taxes and don't pay their fair share. I don't care that Sanders is a millionaire, when he releases his taxes next week if they are above board then cool good for Bernie. He wrote a book that was a best seller, he deserves the money.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Viajero de la Galaxia ().

      Post by Lucretia ().

      This post was deleted by Viajero de la Galaxia: Was fine for the War Room but now that the thread has been split I'm deleting since it's not really SD quality ().

      Post by gerudoyoshi ().

      This post was deleted by Viajero de la Galaxia: Was fine for the War Room but now that the thread has been split I'm deleting since it's not really SD quality ().

      Post by Avalanchemike ().

      This post was deleted by Viajero de la Galaxia: Was fine for the War Room but now that the thread has been split I'm deleting since it's not really SD quality ().
    • In the 21st century virtually no one hoards wealth in the sense Smith meant it, with the exception I guess of serious art collectors and oddball doomsday preppers. No one's criticizing Bezos for having a pile of gold doubloons under his mattress >>
      ~~~
      Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
      ~~~


      boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Foo ().

    • By the sense in which Smith meant it, a lot of the people he would be opposing are actually middle class or lower middle class these days.

      Most of those with extreme wealth estimates these days don't actually have the money; the vast majority of their wealth is tied up in investments, properties, and businesses. Despite it being their net wealth, it's usually money that is still in play and in use. Not money you want to remove.

      I have no idea what the outcome would be if we tried to remove that money from those who have it, but I get an idea it wouldn't be beneficial for anyone; the last time I asked an economist about the topic, they suggested investing in a fallout shelter and a massive amount of guns and ammo. That was the extent of what they were willing to say.
    • It's not money that makes an economy. As Adam Smith says himself, "The real price of everything, what everything really costs to the man who wants to acquire it, is the toil and trouble of acquiring it." Money only ever been backed by faith anyway. It's why my USD is worth differently to an American gas station cashier, to a Chinese vendor, to a vendor in Lichtenstein, to a complete hermit, or to a man with only seconds left to live. But ultimately, money does not generate the goods and services in this country. It is people. Plain and simple. I wish my five dollar bill could magically turn into a Big Mac in front of me right now. The only thing keeping humanity from solving crises like global warming, poverty, and hunger is the ludicrous belief that money runs the world.
    • The labour theory of value has some major issues (something is not better because more work went into making it, basically) for all it's also at least partially true.

      But even beyond that, money isn't valued for anything innate to it, and that's a good thing. Money is valued because it can be exchanged for goods and services, $100 is $100 worth of things or work. It's a medium of exchange, and without it we drown in inefficiencies and waste. I can guarantee that if we were still on the barter system we'd have far more problems than we currently do. Like, the world was not a perfect utopia before the creation of money.

      And yeah, we want money to be innately worthless. Otherwise people will horde it, which is the death of an economy.

      May those who accept their fate be granted happiness;

      Those who defy it, glory!

      The post was edited 1 time, last by John ().

    • urnotlikeme wrote:

      It's not money that makes an economy. As Adam Smith says himself, "The real price of everything, what everything really costs to the man who wants to acquire it, is the toil and trouble of acquiring it." Money only ever been backed by faith anyway. It's why my USD is worth differently to an American gas station cashier, to a Chinese vendor, to a vendor in Lichtenstein, to a complete hermit, or to a man with only seconds left to live. But ultimately, money does not generate the goods and services in this country. It is people. Plain and simple. I wish my five dollar bill could magically turn into a Big Mac in front of me right now. The only thing keeping humanity from solving crises like global warming, poverty, and hunger is the ludicrous belief that money runs the world.
      I see what you're saying, and I kind of agree with the idea, but not really. Unfortunately, the reality is, money does run the world. It's it takes say 5 dollars to get a Big Mac. Where does that money come from? From honest work, I would hope. And why is money needed in today's world? To survive mainly. But it's other things as well. But that's another story.
      What do you do if you have absolutely no money at all. Like you were born with no money in today's world.


      Here's a quote from The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim Dragonborn DLC(I think it rings true here.):

      "You think I've got that kind of money? It takes money to make money, and all that rot." -Rylis Sydaris(spelling)
      The player then has a choice to give funds/money to Rylis for the digging expedition.


      [Gayru Clan banner by Chel]
      (Miku Salt Bae sig by Snurtlicious)

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Amber The Gay Fox ().

    • Amber The Gay Fox wrote:

      the reality is, money does run the world.
      Capitalism is a changeable reality.

      Here is a concept of a currency that is in development in Chicago. I stress development, for as far as I know, the Kola Nut Collaborative only has about sixty people. But time bank is a concept that stretches as far back as 1980. Another alternative is to develop companies in which profit is distributed and shared among the laborers, giving workers an opportunity to fight for the worth of the time of their lives.
    • urnotlikeme wrote:

      Amber The Gay Fox wrote:

      the reality is, money does run the world.
      Capitalism is a changeable reality.
      Here is a concept of a currency that is in development in Chicago. I stress development, for as far as I know, the Kola Nut Collaborative only has about sixty people. But time bank is a concept that stretches as far back as 1980. Another alternative is to develop companies in which profit is distributed and shared among the laborers, giving workers an opportunity to fight for the worth of the time of their lives.
      Basically, voluntary serfdom. I admit, we do have the population for it and certain cyberpunk authors have predicted serfdom would make a comeback.

      Notably, this doesn't actually stop the hoarding of wealth; it just makes it so the time and output of the people you are managing becomes said wealth. Which is why in history serfs eventually became unable to leave the land they inhabited and became effectively slaves to those in power.

      But, hey, maybe this time won't result in oppression of the nonwealthy and the eventual rise of a racist slavery system?
    • Poor people can't move out of their impoverished places of birth today for the same reason a peasant couldn't move away back then: lack of resources. And why were there lack of resources for people to move out? Well, because we decided that a class system in which people who owned stuff deserved to hoard stuff was "ideal".

      And yes, this DOES prevent hoarding. A timebank is a system that rewards people for spending their time, not their resources or money, in helping the community, whereas capitalism is a system that literally rewards you for hoarding money, even if it were in the forms of stocks, bonds, or other assets. Sure you can hoard 50 hours worth of time, but you still gotta give 50 hours worth of service in order to receive anything reciprocal. I'm more okay with a man hoarding hours because he gave that time in his life to help his community, than I am with a person hoarding material possessions because doing so can generate income just by sitting on ass.

      It's hard to call this system serfdom when it lacks a hierarchical structure. If anything, capitalism is "voluntary serfdom", where I can work anywhere I want to, if I wished, but no matter where I work, the majority of my economic value brought through my hard work gets sent up the chain of hierarchy. Sounds a lot like what a serf had to go through, except serfs had the threat of being murdered for choosing not to abide by the system, while we have the threat of starvation. And the worst part? Both feudalism and capitalism rob the laity's ability to fight for the value of their own time and work.

      Capitalists believe that wealth ownership should run an economy, and not people's hard work and time. Therefore they believe in the "oppression of the nonwealthy" and a "racist slavery system". Capitalists believe that capital should employ labor, rather than labor employing capital. Capitalists believe that people exists to create material wealth, rather than material wealth is created to help people.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by urnotlikeme ().

    • If you're accruing something that can be exchanged for good or services then by definition you can horde it, trade for it, etc. It's just money under a different name and has all the same issues, and possibly some new ones. I could buy time off of people, after all. Also, time doesn't inflate, which means that hording it is much more viable. In our current economic systems you don't want to horde money because it loses value over time. But a time bank? An hour is an hour, even fifty years later, so there's no innate incentive to spend it.

      Also, you're using "hording" in a weird way. Invested money is in the pockets of other people. The original owner can get it back, sometimes, but they do not currently have possession of it and it's being used to do work. There are still issues here as to where the money goes, but it's not being hoarded in the sense you seem to think.

      Also also, how, exactly, are you defining "capitalism"? Because it does not require one be a cartoon villain. It simply means that the means of production are not state-owned and that they can be used to make a profit.


      I get being frustrated at how things are now, there's rising wealth inequality and a variety of problems, but saying "the existence of money is an innate evil" feels a lot like mistaking correlation for cause. Especially when your proposed solution is, in fact, just renaming money and making it non-inflationary (which means that hording it is much more viable). My knowledge of economics is limited, but I know enough to spot some pretty major pitfalls that don't seem to be meaningfully addressed.

      May those who accept their fate be granted happiness;

      Those who defy it, glory!
    • If it means the cost of living and medicine no longer rises to impoverishing levels, then I’m fine with that. All the hoarding potential means is that the electric hour is not the complete answer to this ridiculous game of pretend called economics.
    • I define Capitalism as the system in which the means of production is owned by material wealth. Once a capitalist "purchases" a restaurant with material wealth, he then can collect all of the money generated by the people employed, without ever having to put in a single second of effort. For a profit. This is the real concept of capitalism.

      I once held an ETF that paid out dividends every quarter. So by simply putting my money ($1,000 in my situation) into the stock bundle, which I could take out anytime I wished, I would make around $3/quarter, so about $1/month, for doing nothing more than sitting on ass. I do consider this hoarding because instead of using my wealth to generate more wealth for myself, I could have spent that money at a store to generate wealth for someone else in my community. Now let's say I was a million dollar trust fund baby, and I put in $1,000,000 exactly into the same ETF. That means my dividend earnings go up to $1,000/month. Which means I can comfortably sit back on $12,000/yr. Shoot, if I was born with $3 mil, I would never have to work again because I could sit back on a passive $36K/yr.

      The real question is, where did this dividend money come from? To maximize profits, capitalists treat workers as "labor costs", a negative in their eyes. If you've ever worked in a restaurant and got reamed out for working even one minute overtime, you'll understand what I'm talking about. So the cost of labor must be minimal for the profit to be maximized for the shareholder to enjoy.

      If you want to see the direct result of this system, take a walk south on Chicago's Michigan Ave, and I want to see how far south past the highway you can go until you realize that capitalism does not work and in fact enforces poverty. It promotes the bootstraps bullshit, normalizes sloth, and rewards greed.


      John wrote:

      If you're accruing something that can be exchanged for good or services then by definition you can horde it, trade for it, etc.

      The main difference being that if I want to accrue currency in a time bank, I have to generate something of value with my time first. I must perform a service for my community first if I desire the services of others. There is no get rich quick. If you want three hours worth of currency, you must put in three hours worth of currency. If I want to accrue currency in capitalism, I could either wait for my wealthy parents to pass, sue people for their innovations, put people in prison, cheat people out of insurance, own a business and tell all my employees to generate their hard earned wealth for me, monopolize a commodity. These are all very legal things that are destroying communities in the name of capitalism.

      Ultimately, the economy is not about the money flowing through our communities, it's about the goods and services produced and distributed through our society.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by urnotlikeme ().

    • Inequality is already on the rise and jobs are already drying up under the system we have right now. Executives justify their excessively large pay checks by a subjective value of the amount of work they put in when laborers break their backs for pennies. That would be difficult to do if there existed an objective unit of measurement for the value of work.

      Another part of the problem is that we tend to define the value of goods and resources in terms of their scarcity. The rarer a type resource is, the higher its price on the market. Why do people still go hungry despite our surplus production of food? Because widespread distribution is not lucrative in such a system.

      Yes perhaps the electric hour might be more “hoardible” but what that counts for changes in a system where scarcity no longer defines the value of resources.