A big problem with capitalism is that some people can get very, very rich without working hard and actually returning anything to society (for example, investing), Amirite?
I'm pretty sure part of socialism would be stressing providing quality education that is accessible to the public, thus reducing the "uneducated" part. As for "intentionally lazy" I don't know what to tell you, that part just sounds biased.
believe me, there are people who just mooch off the government like he says. socialism does provide the opportunities to do this, therefore there will always be some unambitious people who will simply get by on others' money
As an investor, I want to say that it's really not as easy as most people think. You can't just buy something willy-nilly and expect to make big money off of it. Before I buy into a company, I do several hours a day of research and reading financial statements and news. I'll bounce ideas off of my investor friends to ensure I make the right decision. Even then, I'm occasionally wrong and lose a lot of money (almost $2,000 in 1 day this one time).
My point is, it's still hard work. I''ll cede 2 points though: That the large payoff is disproportionate compared to typical "hard work" professions and that we're really not contributing anything to society. But hey, you gotta pay the bills somehow.
What makes you think CEOs don't do anything? I feel like you have a very obscured and biased view of how a corporation works. CEOs aren't just a bunch of fat guys sitting in leather chairs smoking cigars while they try to figure out ways to make poor people suffer.
Did you know CEOs have one of the highest chances of being fired in a company? It doesn't take a very bad decision for the Board of Directors to decide to throw out the CEO and find a new one.
You do not rake in millions by "not really doing anything".
Investors help companies get resources to grow and they help entrepreneurs start businesses. Without these investments, companies may not be able to build new factories or businesses that can employee hundreds of people.
Yeah they help and donate money, but it isn't really work and they aren't contributing any skills to the world by just giving money away. Giving people money is a very kind thing to do, but it shouldn't be the only thing people do. I'm not saying such instances happen often, but the possibility of someone simply inheriting a lot of money from their family, then just investing it in stock to make themselves even more money may be helping companies, but i don't think its morally right for people to be able to get by by just that alone, if they can be doing so much more
But there's no guarantee when you invest. You can buy all of the stock you want but there's a possibility you won't make any money at all. It's a risk factor and that's why some investors make more than others. The higher the risk, the higher the return on investment.
That being said, it does take certain skills to invest. Some people have those skills and become very wealthy and others don't. Just because it doesn't involve any backbreaking labor it doesn't mean it's not a difficult job. And I don't see how it could possibly be immoral to get by that way. That's like me saying the inventor of Snuggies is immoral for making his money from convincing people that his product isn't just a robe you wear backwards.
then i think it comes down to the point if one can make enough money to get by, just by giving money away, then i believe that they are recieving far more than they are giving and should try to equalize it by doing some other sort of work
A person with money (however they got it) can make more money simply because they have alot of it. Basic idea: Banks give out loans at certain rates. To make these loans and invest in other activities they must attract very wealthy people to put put money in their bank. In order to do this they offer them certain rates. So essentially the poor who are taking out loans are paying the rich who are investing their money.
I believe the majority of wealthy people in America do work very hard. However, studies have shown a lack of economic mobility in the United States. Being economically advantaged/disadvantaged at birth largely determines your financial success/failure as an adult.
Gambling it does sound like. Also, stimulating the arms industry by selling weapons to both sides of a conflict to promote fighting, but not selling enough weapons to give one side the advantage.
How so?
There are many factors that lead to an individual's unemployment, an unemployed person is not simply lazy.
I'm pretty sure part of socialism would be stressing providing quality education that is accessible to the public, thus reducing the "uneducated" part. As for "intentionally lazy" I don't know what to tell you, that part just sounds biased.
I understand we are not going to agree on this issue, I'm just putting in my two cents.
believe me, there are people who just mooch off the government like he says. socialism does provide the opportunities to do this, therefore there will always be some unambitious people who will simply get by on others' money
As an investor, I want to say that it's really not as easy as most people think. You can't just buy something willy-nilly and expect to make big money off of it. Before I buy into a company, I do several hours a day of research and reading financial statements and news. I'll bounce ideas off of my investor friends to ensure I make the right decision. Even then, I'm occasionally wrong and lose a lot of money (almost $2,000 in 1 day this one time).
My point is, it's still hard work. I''ll cede 2 points though: That the large payoff is disproportionate compared to typical "hard work" professions and that we're really not contributing anything to society. But hey, you gotta pay the bills somehow.
Even so, if you pay taxes, you're still contributing to society. Sure, it's an indirect method, but it still helps the general public.
Isn't investing supposed to stimulate the economy?
A big problem with capitalism is that we don't currently have one (in its true free market form).
How do people get very, very rich without working hard?
Investing in companies, or just being the CEO and not really doing anything, while still raking in millions
What makes you think CEOs don't do anything? I feel like you have a very obscured and biased view of how a corporation works. CEOs aren't just a bunch of fat guys sitting in leather chairs smoking cigars while they try to figure out ways to make poor people suffer.
Did you know CEOs have one of the highest chances of being fired in a company? It doesn't take a very bad decision for the Board of Directors to decide to throw out the CEO and find a new one.
You do not rake in millions by "not really doing anything".
I am wrong and i have absolutely no defense. sorry about that
The point about people who get rich off of investments i still feel is valid
Investors help companies get resources to grow and they help entrepreneurs start businesses. Without these investments, companies may not be able to build new factories or businesses that can employee hundreds of people.
Yeah they help and donate money, but it isn't really work and they aren't contributing any skills to the world by just giving money away. Giving people money is a very kind thing to do, but it shouldn't be the only thing people do. I'm not saying such instances happen often, but the possibility of someone simply inheriting a lot of money from their family, then just investing it in stock to make themselves even more money may be helping companies, but i don't think its morally right for people to be able to get by by just that alone, if they can be doing so much more
But there's no guarantee when you invest. You can buy all of the stock you want but there's a possibility you won't make any money at all. It's a risk factor and that's why some investors make more than others. The higher the risk, the higher the return on investment.
That being said, it does take certain skills to invest. Some people have those skills and become very wealthy and others don't. Just because it doesn't involve any backbreaking labor it doesn't mean it's not a difficult job. And I don't see how it could possibly be immoral to get by that way. That's like me saying the inventor of Snuggies is immoral for making his money from convincing people that his product isn't just a robe you wear backwards.
then i think it comes down to the point if one can make enough money to get by, just by giving money away, then i believe that they are recieving far more than they are giving and should try to equalize it by doing some other sort of work
A person with money (however they got it) can make more money simply because they have alot of it. Basic idea: Banks give out loans at certain rates. To make these loans and invest in other activities they must attract very wealthy people to put put money in their bank. In order to do this they offer them certain rates. So essentially the poor who are taking out loans are paying the rich who are investing their money.
I believe the majority of wealthy people in America do work very hard. However, studies have shown a lack of economic mobility in the United States. Being economically advantaged/disadvantaged at birth largely determines your financial success/failure as an adult.
then you'd think more people would do it
Gambling it does sound like. Also, stimulating the arms industry by selling weapons to both sides of a conflict to promote fighting, but not selling enough weapons to give one side the advantage.