An example of wicked capitalism.

[nerdvincent]

I just thought about it.
Bill Gates' personal fortune is $58,000,000,000. Microsoft got 90,000 employees.
What if Bill Gates' personal fortune was equally distributed to every employees? Every employees would receive $644,000.
What would you say? Bill Gates is the boss, he has the right to be richer than his employees? We may or we may not agree.
But let's say he just keeps $20,000,000, which is way more than what he needs to feed his family for a few century, and give all the rest to his employees, would that make everyone happier?
After all, does the the PDG works about two million time more than the coffee-addicted night-shift programmer, as he got a 60 billion dollars bank account while a typical employee is lucky to get over $30,000 when it is time to retire?
What to say about what I call "money pits"?

What the U.S. and the world needs is not a "minimum wage" in order to guarantee some semblance of a descent life, but rather a "maximum permitted wage". Extreme wealth is, in fact, immoral, and is perpetuated by means not available to the majority of people, which makes it a form of theft.

[Compugasm]

Hmm... IMO, that is not the evil of "wicked capitalism". The wickedness is that the corporation trumps the individual in almost every way, and there isn't shit you can do about it.

[HelioPrime]

Why is just having wealth wicked?

So what if people have less wealth than you. If your earned that wealth the Bill gates then it's yours. If you earned it by taking advantage of others then there might be a problem. As such we could probably debate all day on what qualifies as taking advantage. I'm sure some would see any amount of extreme wealth made off workers as evil.

[Clarence]

capitalism is most dangerous when people become so powerful with their money (leverage), that the free market no longer exists. Otherwise, occasionally extreme wealth has given good people the necessary influence to affect the world positively...and Vice-versa, I understand

[Rog]

Quote by: nerdvincent I just thought about it. Bill Gates' personal fortune is $58,000,000,000. Microsoft got 90,000 employees. What if Bill Gates' personal fortune was equally distributed to every employees? Every employees would receive $644,000. What would you say? Bill Gates is the boss, he has the right to be richer than his employees? We may or we may not agree. But let's say he just keeps $20,000,000, which is way more than what he needs to feed his family for a few century, and give all the rest to his employees, would that make everyone happier? After all, does the the PDG works about two million time more than the coffee-addicted night-shift programmer, as he got a 60 billion dollars bank account while a typical employee is lucky to get over $30,000 when it is time to retire? What to say about what I call "money pits"?

In case you missed, he retired and donated half of his personal fortune to charity.how much did you donated today?

[nerdvincent]

Quote by: HelioPrime So what if people have less wealth than you. If your earned that wealth the Bill gates then it's yours. If you earned it by taking advantage of others then there might be a problem. As such we could probably debate all day on what qualifies as taking advantage. I'm sure some would see any amount of extreme wealth made off workers as evil.

Did Bill Gates actually earned 60 billion dollars? No. I think a man's work cannot worth more than 2-3 million dollar in a lifetime.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Bill Gates isn't a terribly good example for earning, given the people he screwed to get it, but, then again, to be that rich you screw some people along the way. In capitalism, if you are able to get money legally, you earned it according to the market.

[nerdvincent]

Quote by: Rog In case you missed, he retired and donated half of his personal fortune to charity.how much did you donated today?

I said Bill Gates, but the same can be applied to many not-that-philantropic multibillion dollars dude.

[Compugasm]

Quote by: nerdvincent Did Bill Gates actually earned 60 billion dollars? No. I think a man's work cannot worth more than 2-3 million dollar in a lifetime.

Yeah, no shit, haters. Anyway, just out of curiosity, I would like to know what impact it would have on the environment, if his donation was used to buy everyone in America a hybrid car, or electric vehical. I mean, it's not such a crazy "what if" with fortunes that large. Blah blah blah selfish arguments aside. Someone should do the math, and figure out what would happen.

[nerdvincent]

Quote by: Compugasm Yeah, no shit, haters. Anyway, just out of curiosity, I would like to know what impact it would have on the environment, if his donation was used to buy everyone in America a hybrid car, or electric vehical. I mean, it's not such a crazy "what if" with fortunes that large.

I'd like to see that kind of thing too!
Let's say we need a car for every 4 people (even though I think we actually need less...), that would mean 75 million cars. This would mean that every american family would have $800 to buy a new car. We're still far from buying electric car with Bill Gate's money.
But it is possible to get alternatives: let's say we build an electric minibus for every 30 people, with $60,000 per bus (even though it is more expensive...)->600 billion bucks -_-'. We're still lacking somewhere.

A good thing would be deveopping solar/wind power.

Anyway, I'm getting off-topic...

[nerdvincent]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary Bill Gates isn't a terribly good example for earning, given the people he screwed to get it, but, then again, to be that rich you screw some people along the way. In capitalism, if you are able to get money legally, you earned it according to the market.

Guess why I love capitalism. It is legal to get rich by screwing people, some people even call it "earning money".

[Clarence]

Gates definitly has a little more giving to do, s'far as I can tell. But I see hope in him. supposedly he stole this and that but I do not get get a bad vibe from the man. Just needs to figure out what he needs to do exactly. That's the hardest part, you see?

Are hybrid cars the answer?
How about 35 nuclear reactors and whole new power grid?
Bill Gates could apply his intelligence to good will and invest in solutions to our world. I'm sure he could suggest viable solutions for the future's problems, given enough motivation. He probably just cant decide what to do exactly. That's my guess

[nerdvincent]

Quote by: Clarence Gates definitly has a little more giving to do, s'far as I can tell. But I see hope in him. supposedly he stole this and that but I do not get get a bad vibe from the man. Just needs to figure out what he needs to do exactly. That's the hardest part, you see? Are hybrid cars the answer? How about 35 nuclear reactors and whole new power grid? Bill Gates could apply his intelligence to good will and invest in solutions to our world. I'm sure he could suggest viable solutions for the future's problems, given enough motivation. He probably just cant decide what to do exactly. That's my guess

I see what you mean. As a matter of fact, I like Mr Gates philantropism. But I know some dude from Saudi Arabia who aren't that fair. I hope as well.
I don't want to make my tiresome communist propaganda, but if we were living in a commi state (with a direct democracy so the people could decide where the money is going, I'm working on my theory), such amount of money would directly be used for renewable energy or fairytales like that. No need to beg Mr Gates or hope that he will feel generous tomorow.

[ironeagle]

You know it's interesting that you attack Bill Gates and other rich business men, considering it was his invention that opened the door for millions of people all around the world to work nice high paying and rewarding jobs in computer sciences. Including the fact his company makes it possible for millions of people to have jobs. Wealthy businesses and owners create jobs for the people, without them there probably wouldn't be many advanced and competative wage jobs for the average joe to apply for. It's not up to you to limit the income of a man who has acomplished great things, and it's not fair to take away, cap or redistribute his money which he gets because the millions of people he hires or who use his software and the thousand of companies using technology based on his software, who hire normal people happen to have businesses using the technology he and his company built. It's the same as an author getting royalties for every book they sell. I find that people who believe in the restriction of wages (outside the governemnt) are just jealous they haven't acomplished such a great task. If you could invent something so new and reveloutionary that your family would never again struggle for healthcare, food, clothing, or shelter, would you let some a** wipe from some other country tell you "I think you make too much give it all to other people"? Many business owners don't share the wealth and that's a sucky way to do business, but then again many business owners do share the wealth, such as creating better benefits, lower insurance premiums, yearly bonuses, performance bonuses, high wage jobs and pay increases, they also donate money to help other business and organizations. Redistribution of money is evil and is stealing, and that is immoral. additionally it is not Bill Gates who is making money off his workers, it is the worker sand the companies using his technology and software that are making money off of him.

[Night]

Making a "maximum wage" sounds outright communist to me. I think Mr. Gates deserves every dime. Gates has created an entire industry and made one of the most successful companies on the planet. He, and people in his category (Steve Jobs, Warren Buffet, and other billionaires etc) deserve financial compensation for their success.

Quote by: Night Making a "maximum wage" sounds outright communist to me. I think Mr. Gates deserves every dime. Gates has created an entire industry and made one of the most successful companies on the planet. He, and people in his category (Steve Jobs, Warren Buffet, and other billionaires etc) deserve financial compensation for their success.

For entrepreneurs, inventors, and investors who are not the fortunate beneficiaries of wealthy families making the first million is really difficult. Making the second million not as tough. And so on. Each subsequent increase in fortune is easier and easier. You can be sure that today Jobs, Buffet, Gates, et al make billions with little risk and by applying little skill.

Sure, people deserve financial compensation for their achievements. The question is to what extent? And to what adverse affect on the rest of the world's people? Moreover, few of today's uber-wealthy attained their wealth by means of achievement. They are wealthy because of hereditary position as in Saudi Arabia or because of family.

How is that someone with a billion dollars deserves--let alone needs or could spend--a second billion or a tenth billion?

[The Dunedan]

How is that someone with a billion dollars deserves--let alone needs or could spend--a second billion or a tenth billion?

He made it, it's his. 'Nough said. It's not anyone's business but his how, if, where, when, or why he chooses to spend -his- money. That money's in his pocket because he (or people he hired) invented a product people want and are willing to pay for. Nobody held a gun to the back of anyone's head and forced them to buy Windows instead of running Linux or Opera or any of the other OSs out there: people decided they wanted Windows for whatever reason.

I'm always impressed by the unqualified hubris of people who think they (or people who think like them) get to decide upon some arbitrary "fair" amount of wealth which they'll graciously allow someone else to posess, while stealing the remainder.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: nerdvincent Guess why I love capitalism. It is legal to get rich by screwing people, some people even call it "earning money".

If people are willing to give you the money, and, granted, Gates did kind of shape the modern world.

I don't want to make my tiresome communist propaganda, but if we were living in a commi state (with a direct democracy so the people could decide where the money is going, I'm working on my theory), such amount of money would directly be used for renewable energy or fairytales like that. No need to beg Mr Gates or hope that he will feel generous tomorow.

How do you know that the people would make the correct decision? They might just vote it into their own pockets and then you wouldn't even get advances in computer technology. No matter how many people are involved, if that much money is at stake, it's going to get corrupted.

[Kamehameha34]

Quote by: sdbest For entrepreneurs, inventors, and investors who are not the fortunate beneficiaries of wealthy families making the first million is really difficult. Making the second million not as tough. And so on. Each subsequent increase in fortune is easier and easier. You can be sure that today Jobs, Buffet, Gates, et al make billions with little risk and by applying little skill. Sure, people deserve financial compensation for their achievements. The question is to what extent? And to what adverse affect on the rest of the world's people? Moreover, few of today's uber-wealthy attained their wealth by means of achievement. They are wealthy because of hereditary position as in Saudi Arabia or because of family. How is that someone with a billion dollars deserves--let alone needs or could spend--a second billion or a tenth billion?

They deserve it because it is their property.

If someone inherits a fortune, it is the previous owner of the fortune's wish that it go to whomever is in the will. Since the fortune belonged to the previous owner, s/he can do whatever s/he wants with it.

That's how things work in the civilised world, where there isn't (or shouldn't be) a teacher to punish us for not 'bringing enough for the rest of the class.'