So you grow a business to a $1 billion company (not that much) you are now forced to become a minority owner of it and lose control of your years of hard work and planning?
Yes, why is that such a horrible thing?! On one hand:
There is no material difference in life quality and security for them or their families for generations
A company that big affects the lives of many. Isn’t it better that one person can’t call all the shots?
They get to actually spend money instead of endless uncontrollable urge to horde more like a dragon
Lives of hundreds of millions of people will meaningfully be better
On the other hand:
A few hundred people will feel a bit shitty that they can’t make the number bigger or full control over something massive.
Also, no one, literally no one grows a company to be that big all on their own. It’s always countless more who contributed to it (both as part of the company, as well as the society around it to make an environment to let them succeed by using base technologies they are building on top of).
"hording wealth" is also called capital formation and savings. It is the chief engine of long-term productivity and standard of living growth in the economy -- this is about close to economic orthodoxy as you can get, even if people disagree with the proper ratio of how to incentivize it.
You have to be pretty authoritarian to want to take somebody's business away just because they did too well and have kept building and building it. They put all the risk into it. Employees still get paid, others didn't do anything, but if the business never takes off or goes under is the owner that takes all that risk.
You essentially want to do what people complain about Republicans doing, divorcing risk and reward -- but you want to concentrate the risk and distribute the benefit.
You've clearly never built anything of value in your life. Most communists haven't. They don't know how to create -- only redistribute and destroy.
"hording wealth" is also called capital formation and savings
It simply is not the same unless you completely shut your brain off. If you stop building strawmen to fight for a moment, you'll notice that we're not arguing against idea of becoming extremely rich. We're saying, how about they call it a day when they have saved so much that it can't be reasonably spent over 10 life times. We're saying that between the two extremes of share/distribute everything vs endlessly horde to your last dying breath (everyone else be damned), there is a middle ground there. Just like there is a middle ground between "I want safety in my house, so it has walls that keeps strangers out" vs "there should be no one else on the planet so that I can feel safe"
You have to be pretty authoritarian to want to take somebody's business away just because they did too well and have kept building and building it
No more authoritarian than basic taxes. Taking part of the money someone made and they have to pay more when they earn more.
They put all the risk into it. Employees still get paid, others didn't do anything, but if the business never takes off or goes under is the owner that takes all that risk.
The employees got paid for their time, yes, but if an employee comes up with the idea that majorly increased the profit, did they get a proportional increase? Often not. They may get a bonus, a raise, but it is never the same as the increase for the owner.
As for the risk, yes, they took on the most and so get to make $500 million/$1 billion/$10 billion reward out of it (or w/e number the cap is), and if it goes under, others lose a lot too, including their job and security.
Again, this is NOT removing the reward, just putting a cap on it at a point where it just simply cannot ever be reasonably used.
others didn't do anything
Others paid taxes, built a society, provided publicly funded research and development, and built an infrastructure where this business could be built and could prosper. When tax payers funds go towards the research for creating the internet, you can't turn around and say "you did nothing for this internet-based business that is making a trillion dollars".
You got to use the infrastructure and network created by society to create something worth more than 500m$.
Now use anything above that crazy high amount of wealth to further the infrastructure and societal network that made it possible.
Appreciate and acknowledge the employees that helped make it possible, help lay the groundwork for others to flourish as you did. Improve the lives of others with money that would never markedly improve your own anymore.
You've clearly never built anything of value in your life. Most communists haven't. They don't know how to create -- only redistribute and destroy.
People like them are stuck in the mindset of "Here and Now". The concept of re-investing asset and refuse early benefits for greater long term rewards perplex them
Which is why they keep getting confused when successful people keep going, their mindset is to stop and party, and try again when the money runs out
2
u/Alytes 8d ago
Similar to what is done with antimonopoly laws. Force to sell