Which, by the way, *never* happens. I can't think of a single case where someone with hundreds of millions of dollars "risked" so much that they had to sell their labor in order to survive, like the rest of us.
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
but capitalists risk huge sums of money, whereas workers only risk their relatively inconsequential lives
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
inheritance is a big problem, and the matthew-effect (concentration tends to greater concentration)
-
Do you believe that to be true for small family farms as well?
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
And precisely the opposite is true anyway: Capitalist shareholders are explicitly shielded from risk by limited liability.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
the risk was all those banks and poorly run auto companies went out of business during the recession oh wait
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Obviously the owners are risking a lot more than the workers, here's the evidence:pic.twitter.com/9wPfyir90T
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
And meanwhile many of the capitalists' costs and risks have been socialized, and competition is suppressed by regulatory cartels, entry barriers, "intellectual property," etc. The vast majority of profits are economic rents of one kind or another.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
What about people who are workers for years, saving all they can, then use all their life savings to start a business?
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.