zlacker

i think a lot of people have been able to become billionaires simply by building something that was initially significantly undervalued and then became very highly valued, no 'screwing'. there is such thing as a win-win and frankly these win-wins account for most albeit not all value creation in the world. you do not have to screw other people to get rich.

whether people should be able to hold on to that billion is a different question

>>whimsi+(OP)
I wouldn't know, I'm not a billionaire. But when you hear about Amazon warehouse workers peeing into bottles because they they don't have long enough bathroom breaks, or Walmart workers not having healthcare because they're intentionally scheduled for 39.5 hours, it's hard to see that anyone could get to a billion without screwing someone over. But like I said, I'm not a billionaire.

>>whimsi+(OP)
They aren’t win-wins

It’s a ruse - it’s a con - it’s an accounting trick. It’s the foundation of capitalism

If I start a bowling pin production company and own 100% of it, then whatever pins I sell all of the results go to me

Now let say I want to expand my thing (that’s its own moral dilemma we won’t get into), so I promise a person with more money than they need to support their own life, to give me money in exchange for some of the future revenue produced, let’s say 10%

So now you have two people requiring payment - a producer and an “investor” so you’re already in the hole and now it’s 90% and 10%

You use that money to hire people to work in your potemkin dictatorship, with demands on proceeds now on some timeline (note conversion date, next board meeting etc)

So now you hire 10 people, how much of the company do they own? Well that’s totally up to whatever the two owners want including 0%

But let’s say it’s a typical venture deal, so 10% option pool for employees (and don’t forget the 4 year vest, cause we can’t have them mobile can we) which you fill up.

At the end of the four years you now have:

1 80% owner 1 10% owner 10 1% owners

Did the 2 people create 90% of the value of the company?

Only in capitalist math does that hold and in fact the only math capitalists do is the following:

“Well they were free to sign or not sign the contract”

Ignoring the reality of the world based on a worldview of greed that dominated the world to such an extent that it was considered “normal”

Luckily we’re starting to see the tide change

>>fragme+o5
Who did JK Rowling screw? (putting aside her recent social issues after she already became a billionaire)

Having these discussions in this current cultural moment is difficult. I'm no lover of billionaires, but to say that every billionaire screwed people over relies on esoteric interpretations of value and who produces it. These interpretations (like the labor-theory of value) are alien to the vast majority of people.

>>Andrew+PQ
Putting aside your labor theory of value nonsense (I'm very familiar with the classic leftist syllogisms on this), who did someone like JK Rowling screw to make her billion?

>>whimsi+191
aside from the way she's terrible, she's not terrible?

the wonderful thing any capitalism is that you can absolve yourself of guilt by having someone else do your dirty work for you. are you so sure every single seamstress that made clothes and stuffed animals, and the workers at the toy factories, and every single person involved with the making of the movies for the Harry Potter deals she licensed her work to were well compensated and treated well? that's not directly on her, but at least some of her money comes from there

>>fragme+sX1
How is JK Rowling terrible, exactly?

>>comput+Hf3
I was referring to the parenthetical