Is weath possible only if others suffer poverty?

[Nucking Futs]

Help me understand this idea, that wealth accumulation is only possible when others are in poverty.

Is that true?

Say somebody starts with nothing, and builds a business that eventually puts that person into the top 1% of income. Was that possible without others being poor?

What do you think?

 

[dagle]

You would have to narrowly define "wealth" and "poverty/poor". To a villager in a third world country, welfare participants in the US are wealthy. It's relative and perspective, in my opinion.

 

[Reli]

The entire meaning behind the word "wealthy" means having "stuff" that most people don't. If everyone had what you had, you wouldn't be wealthy.

 

[SFSV650]

By definition, wealth is one side of inequality.
A little bit of inequality is a good thing.
A lot of inequality is a bad thing.

How much is 'a lot' depends on one's perspective.

How much inequality is sustainable is a question which may be possible to answer academically and probably impossible to achieve.

 

[budman]

At this time in humanity I think so (there will be rich and poor).
I am unaware of a civilization where everyone lived well for sure.

Once we form the Federation of Planets things will change and we will all live well and prosper

 

[byke]

I'm not sure how the answer could be anything other than "no".

 

[DataDan]

Help me understand this idea, that wealth accumulation is only possible when others are in poverty.

Is that true?

Say somebody starts with nothing, and builds a business that eventually puts that person into the top 1% of income. Was that possible without others being poor?

What do you think?

She built that business with her mind--an idea for a new gizmo or process, or identifying a trend before others did--and, at first, her own sweat. To hire help, she had to compete with all the other employers in the neighborhood and pay the prevailing wage. Maybe even more if workers thought her idea was a little loopy. They didn't lose a thing. And the talented ones probably ended up making a boatload more money in the thriving business than they would have sticking with a more conventional enterprise.

 

[#1Freak]

did bill gates or steve jobs make other peeps poor? no, they created innovation, which helped everybody. They also created jobs. They grew the pie, they did not divide it up

 

[Abacinator]

There will always be the "haves" and the "have-nots". So long as the haves let the have-nots keep enough wealth, the rich folks' heads will remain attached to their bodies.

 

[TylerW]

When a CEO takes home a salary that is 20x that of a non-C-Level employee, is it because he works 20x more than other employees? Or that his contributions to the company are 20x more valuable?

 

[Karbon]

Something something Das Kapital

something something no ethical consumption under capitalistic systems.

 

[#1Freak]

When a CEO takes home a salary that is 20x that of a non-C-Level employee, is it because he works 20x more than other employees? Or that his contributions to the company are 20x more valuable?

both

 

[TylerW]

both

How do you figure?

MOre importantly, if it's both, why isn't he taking home a salary that's 400x more than other employees?

 

[Eldritch]

Help me understand this idea, that wealth accumulation is only possible when others are in poverty.

Is that true?

Say somebody starts with nothing, and builds a business that eventually puts that person into the top 1% of income. Was that possible without others being poor?

What do you think?

No, it is not numerically impossible to get wealthy without benefiting from the suffering of others, but it certainly makes it easier.

 

[afm199]

Help me understand this idea, that wealth accumulation is only possible when others are in poverty.

Is that true?

Say somebody starts with nothing, and builds a business that eventually puts that person into the top 1% of income. Was that possible without others being poor?

What do you think?

Define wealth. Define poverty.

If there is only hot water, is it hot?

 

[byke]

OP defined wealthy as top 1% income and 2018 federal poverty level can be found via goomgle. :x

 

[easter bunny]

Wealth isn't relative. Wealth is "having an abundance of valuable possessions or money." That doesn't mean other people have to be poor. I have wealth and I'm barely middle class. Maybe it's not an abundance but lord knows I'm thankful for everything I have.

 

[CoorsLight]

For those of you with a yes or no answer: what is your evidence, and what assumptions are you making?

 

[bojangle]

Wealth isn't relative. Wealth is "having an abundance of valuable possessions or money." That doesn't mean other people have to be poor. I have wealth and I'm barely middle class. Maybe it's not an abundance but lord knows I'm thankful for everything I have.

I'd say it IS relative. You have a given purchasing power with your stated modest wealth. That purchasing power is directly related to cheap overseas product availability made in poverty sweat shop conditions, as well as underpaid unbenefitted service workers. If those people did not live in relative poverty, things would cost much more money, thereby significantly diminishing the purchasing power of your wealth.

 

[Climber]

did bill gates or steve jobs make other peeps poor? no, they created innovation, which helped everybody. They also created jobs. They grew the pie, they did not divide it up

The guy who created DOS only ever saw $50k in his lifetime.
Microsoft essentially stole Stacker, then when sued they bought the company.
Microsoft knocked Borland and the creator of spreadsheets out of the business software market by dumping Office on the market at cost, kind of like China is doing now.
Many other things that Microsoft did, they made offers to the top 5 graduates of Harvard Law School each year....why do you suppose they did that?

Steve Jobs was brilliant, but he also did plenty of nefarious things.