U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-11-2012, 02:29 PM
 
Location: Pluto's Home Town
9,986 posts, read 12,268,926 times
Reputation: 5634

Advertisements

At their core, capitalism and wealth creation are fed by innovation. When a minority of people, especially the older and established, own and accumulate the majority of wealth, and they use that wealth to game the system against everyone else, creativity is limited. Scientific studies have shown that the most original innovations will be initiated in the early 30s. Not exclusively, or course, but the armies of Mark Zuckerbergs and Bill Gates of the world are going to be more innovative than a few guys like Donald Trump.

Who is going to be more "hungry" and creative, a half dozen 60 something billionaires or 60,000 20-30 somethings chasing their first six figure pay check? When wealth aggregates, the genius of America is cut off at the roots. I have nothing against the wealthy, but thinking that making very rich persons richer will rekindle the American economy defies common sense.

We need to enable the young, hungry, and creative.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-11-2012, 02:42 PM
 
Location: Tuscaloosa, AL
121 posts, read 118,522 times
Reputation: 118
This hints at the notion that the economy is a zero-sum game. Of course, it also hints at the notion that the government should be in the business of picking winners, when it many ways that is exactly how the wealth aggregation you're describing has come about.

Last edited by NormalCarpetRide; 06-11-2012 at 03:06 PM.. Reason: My inability to use your/you're correctly.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 02:45 PM
 
Location: Pluto's Home Town
9,986 posts, read 12,268,926 times
Reputation: 5634
Quote:
Originally Posted by NormalCarpetRide View Post
This hints at the notion that the economy is a zero-sum game. Of course, it also hints at the notion that the government should be in the business of picking winners, when it many ways that is exactly how the wealth aggregation your describing has come about.
The government already picks winners. Except more precisely it picks those who have already won. That is the problem, it is regressive, working for the past winners rather than helping the new ones.

Last edited by Fiddlehead; 06-11-2012 at 03:06 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 02:47 PM
 
3,457 posts, read 3,262,308 times
Reputation: 1532
Quote:
Originally Posted by NormalCarpetRide View Post
This hints at the notion that the economy is a zero-sum game. Of course, it also hints at the notion that the government should be in the business of picking winners, when it many ways that is exactly how the wealth aggregation your describing has come about.
Government is already picking winners; I think he's saying we shouldn't be doing that.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 02:47 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,765 posts, read 26,092,281 times
Reputation: 12276
Quote:
Originally Posted by NormalCarpetRide View Post
This hints at the notion that the economy is a zero-sum game. Of course, it also hints at the notion that the government should be in the business of picking winners, when it many ways that is exactly how the wealth aggregation your describing has come about.
Why do you think leads the government into the business of picking winners? Are these courtesy of "investments" injected into governments?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 02:50 PM
 
5,915 posts, read 4,375,527 times
Reputation: 1396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead View Post

We need to enable the young, hungry, and creative.
Have you heard of venture capitalism?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 02:56 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,765 posts, read 26,092,281 times
Reputation: 12276
An excellent interview, relevant to the subject at hand. Link to full episode (so if disinterested in the rest, simply fast forward). I haven't seen the interview in its entirety since it ran past allotted time but the full version was posted online as is normally the case: The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - Edward Conard (June 7, 2012)

Edward Conard is former member of Bain Capital, and was promoting his new book: Unintended Consequences
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 02:59 PM
 
79,571 posts, read 37,099,396 times
Reputation: 16155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead View Post
The government already picks winners. Except more precisely is picks those who have already won. That is the problem, it is regressive, working for the past winners rather than helping the new ones.
Having the government not picking winners would exclude them from picking this kind also.

Gates didn't need anyone to pick him.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 03:05 PM
 
Location: Tuscaloosa, AL
121 posts, read 118,522 times
Reputation: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead View Post
The government already picks winners. Except more precisely is picks those who have already won. That is the problem, it is regressive, working for the past winners rather than helping the new ones.
Yes, that is what I said. The government picks winners, which has lead to the wealth aggregation you referenced.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 03:07 PM
 
Location: Lower east side of Toronto
10,570 posts, read 11,367,290 times
Reputation: 9352
Bad management is bad management. Capitalists who believe in social and economic Darwinism..which are most..have to face the fact that some de-evolve...and some have to step down. Or some are in a high position due to privilege and familiar entitlement- Those that inherit their high places...Genetics is strange- Just because your dad was a wizard in business and management of an empire does not mean you are..You may have inherited the brain of crazy old Aunt Martha the pill popping crazy cat lady...and would be better off fishing some where spending money than ruining an empire.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:31 PM.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top