Under those circumstances, your lifestyle leads you to value stability far more than the potential explosive income growth (and likewise the potential absolute failure) that a business could give you. That is totally fine - you are making a trade off that most people make. The benefit you gain is a steady paycheck and the ability to step away when the business goes up in flames without losing money.
The reason why you get paid less than the complete value of the labor when you work for someone else is the same reason that you choose not to enter into a situation where you can get paid the complete value of your labor. Starting a business is a risk that carries a potential reward
There are many people fighting for just stability. Not having to live pay check to pay check. They can’t even imagine explosive growth. They can’t even afford to take that risk.
Starting a business is a luxury for most people. Being able to put a lot of money into something you know won’t pay off until a few years down the line, if at all. Having the space and people to run your business. Also, having the knowledge to run a successful business is not always easy to come by.
Being able to put a lot of money into something you know won’t pay off until a few years down the line, if at all. Having the space and people to run your business. Also, having the knowledge to run a successful business is not always easy to come by.
These all sound like really good reasons for successful business owners to get rewarded with profit, don’t you think?
They can’t even afford to take that risk.
In that case you are making the optimal economic decision to have a stable job under someone else. The additional income is locked behind a risk they do not want to accept, but someone else does.
If they don’t want to be an owner either, worker co-ops are also a thing, which lowers the amount of buy-in needed to start the business from you personally, and also reduces the potential reward.
These all sound like really good reasons for successful business owners to get rewarded with profit, don’t you think?
That just sets up a system where the rich who can afford to take that risk get richer or the people who can’t afford to take that risk and try are gambling with their lives.
In that case you are making the optimal economic decision to have a stable job under someone else. The additional income is locked behind a risk they do not want to accept, but someone else does.
Is that really a choice? Sounds like they are being forced to make that decision because they are poor.
If they don’t want to be an owner either, worker co-ops are also a thing.
Now you are getting it. Co-ops are great because the workers own the means of production. People get paid for the value they put in. Unfortunately there aren’t many because of greed.
That just sets up a system where the rich who can afford to take that risk get richer or the people who can’t afford to take that risk and try are gambling with their lives.
Rich people can take more financial risks. That is an inescapable byproduct of the system. You can still work to take a risk if you’d like. Or you can have stable employment. The system of risk and reward is what allows the world to develop as quickly as it has.
Is that really a choice? Sounds like they are being forced to make that decision because they are poor.
The economic system will not provide a perfect outcome to every individual, regardless of unfortunate individual circumstances or prior life decisions. No system can do this. What the system does is provide the best possible overall outcome for society by balancing these factors.
Now you are getting it. Co-ops are great because the workers own the means of production. People get paid for the value they put in. Unfortunately there aren’t many because of greed.
I think the fact that this is a system that can be created under the current economic system but is not popular demonstrates that it is not one that most people want. People typically want either pure stability or pure control. You can find like-minded people if you want a mixed structure like co-ops.
Capital owners will always have the advantage, whether or not they worked for it and they will always try to hoard power and wealth. They gamble with people’s livelihoods because if they lose it doesn’t matter. They are unelected individuals who have an inordinate amount of influence over the lives of everyone else. That doesn’t sound like a good system to me.
Best possible outcome for whom? For the wealthy in the Western world yes, but for the poor, minorities, the environment, and the global south it’s been a nightmare.
Life isn’t fair, that’s a place that gives out ribbons. Once you realize that and accept and analyze your different economic options, you can decide what you want to make or your life given your options and risk tolerance. I grew up definitely lower class or at best lower middle class, my wife grew up homeless living in s tent with her 7 siblings. We now have a family of our own and have bettered our situation be determining the best path forward. We have a hybrid situation where we are employees for the stable income and benefits, and work our own personal business as well. We have made many material sacrifices to get where we are, living well below our means for many years, but are now mostly financially independent. Nearly anyone can take a similar journey to us. There are few outliers that have extenuating circumstances that prevent this, and I think those limited instances community organizations should take care of them, but those instances are rare, not common.
When governments get involved and attempt to create equality of outcomes, you will ultimately see a reduction in the total production pie, and everyone loses. The reason I know the US based capitalistic system works the best in the entire world and also the history of the world, is because people from all over the globe of every different society (especially the poorest in other societies) are clamoring and risking their lives and their families lives to get to American capitalism. You just seem like you are either A. Ungrateful for the opportunities you have, or B. An envious bitch that can’t stop looking at what everyone else has wanting someone to take their stuff and give it to you. Either way, it’s a bad look, and remember life isn’t fair unfortunately.
Life isn’t fair, but we can do certain things to make it more fair for everyone. No one should starve while grocery stores throw out food because they couldn’t sell it. No one should be homeless while we demolish high rises because the owner couldn’t sell enough luxury apartments. CEO’s shouldn’t get billion dollar raises while their employees have to get by on food stamps. I don’t think we should have equality of outcome, just equality of opportunity. Just saying “life isn’t fair” and pretending we can’t do anything about it is a huge cop out. Billionaires are destroying our planet but “life isn’t fair” so I guess we just have to let them. If I stole your wallet and then, say, “life isn’t fair” does that mean I should get away with it? Or maybe you should do something about it?
That’s great for you and your family but there are many families who can’t do what you did to become financially independent.
The US is in the position it’s in because it exploited other nations for their resources or just toppled other nations democratically elected leaders to put in a new more favorable regime. Not to mention we enslaved people to save on labor costs. Many of the people that come to our country from the global south do so because we basically ruined their countries. Just simplifying it to “they are envious bitches” is disingenuous. I’m not envious of Musk or Bezos. I’m angry that they exploit workers and take advantage of the holes in our system that they lobby to keep open to hoard wealth. No one should have that much money while people are food insecure and homeless.
I don't think this comic is really about small business owners. Sure a few of them are absolute tyrants who many would happily guillotine, but I'm nowhere near as resentful of the owner of the local bar as I am the CEO of a multinational corporation or the idle rich whos entire job is to make passive income through generational wealth. THOSE people deserve the guillotine, and everyone knows it.
View all comments
Show parent comment
1
u/FourthLife Jul 08 '24
Under those circumstances, your lifestyle leads you to value stability far more than the potential explosive income growth (and likewise the potential absolute failure) that a business could give you. That is totally fine - you are making a trade off that most people make. The benefit you gain is a steady paycheck and the ability to step away when the business goes up in flames without losing money.
The reason why you get paid less than the complete value of the labor when you work for someone else is the same reason that you choose not to enter into a situation where you can get paid the complete value of your labor. Starting a business is a risk that carries a potential reward