Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst
1
2
  1. #21
    Pit Lord RaoBurning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Arizona, US
    Posts
    2,457
    I don't really consider the creation of billionaires a social positive on the whole anyway, so... go Sweden? I mean it's fine to make money, but same some water for the other fish, ya?
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    This is America. We always have warm dead bodies.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dacien View Post
    In order to have an actual impact, gun confiscation is the only solution.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Intersectional Gringo View Post
    So, you are saying that a brand of capitalism that is designed to not create a lot of billionaires....does not create a lot of billionaires. Yeah, that kind of checks out? You will likely find similar numbers for countries like Germany and Japan, since they follow the same variety of capitalism. Not saying either kind is better, really, just that the systems are designed differently and thus lead to different outcomes. Just look at innovation, for example. CMEs focus on incremental innovation, refining processes and limited how much of an edge you can get with a new patent. On the other hand, in the US, the focus is on big jumps in technology. A company that can get the patent on something awesome makes some serious bank. That leads to more of these bigger jumps in tech coming from LMEs, but at the same time, incremental innovation is often not worth it and many are hesitant to even do R&D, if they cannot get one of these breakthroughs. CMEs advance at a relatively steady pace, while LMEs tend to stagnate for long stretches, then get a massive boost. It also leads to more tech monopolies and a more antagonistic research culture.
    That is just one aspect, of course. Just like the welfare state is one. It plays into this, certainly, but it is not the only difference to look at. Someone who has a stroke of genius in the US is pretty much guaranteed to become a millionaire (or make someone else a millionaire, who snatches it from that person), while in a CME, they get rewarded well, but not at that level.

    In the end, again, no system is inherently better imho. Think of it this way - in the US, it is easier to make it big, to become a billionaire even without inherited wealth (though usually not without being at least somewhat well-off these days, but that is another topic entirely), but it is also much easier to crash, burn, and fall into poverty. It creates more billionaires per 1 million people, but it also creates more people below the poverty line than Sweden. It's basically the difference between having a high variance or a low one when it comes to income, with a similar average. Which you prefer depends entirely on you, really. In the US, entrepreneurship and making lots of money are basically worshiped. In countries like Sweden, they are not. People in both countries can be happy with that, and both can do well economically. Billionaires only make up a tiny percentage in both countries anyway. This is certainly not the same as during those days when there was an actual nobility that had the people suffer - because that combined an inequality of top wealth transmitted to the next generation with a massive, general income inequality. Sweden, for example, does worse in the former than the US, but not in the latter. So, even if rich families stay rich, they do not do so at the expense of those less fortunate.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Kiri View Post
    In the end, again, no system is inherently better imho.
    There is an "inherently better system", and it's the one that does not sacrifice a good portion of their population just to chase useless "economic growth".
    "My successes are my own, but my failures are due to extremist leftist liberals" - Party of Personal Responsibility

    Prediction for the future

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by PosPosPos View Post
    There is an "inherently better system", and it's the one that does not sacrifice a good portion of their population just to chase useless "economic growth".
    Well, I was mostly comparing systemic features, not their real execution. LMEs do not have to sacrifice a good portion of their population. The US version just kind of decides to do that, haha.

  5. #25
    Scarab Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark, Europe
    Posts
    4,225
    Quote Originally Posted by Intersectional Gringo View Post
    Socialism is when there is a permanent nobility in your country and the more permanent it is, the better.

    This is your brain on leftism.
    I guess if you ignore everything about socialism and replace it with complete fiction of your own choosing then obviously you are right

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •