Nostr Web Client

A lot to discuss. A few things…we disagree on the fundamental risk profiles of being an entrepreneur and being an employee. An employee has options if they lose their job. It’s at-will employment, they will find another job if they don’t feel appreciated or compensated enough. Employers will replace employees if they feel they are entitled and not bringing enough value to a business, that’s the beauty of autonomy.

I wasn’t intending to describe a “boss” mentality. I work alongside plenty with my crew. My work is usually much different than theirs, however. Our employees are good tradesmen, not good estimators, salesmen, or accountants, etc. The difference in roles automatically creates a dichotomy. I pursue the projects, submit to try to win them, coordinate everything in between in order to provide work for our people to do their job and earn their living.

If something goes wrong, I get the call, not them. If there’s an emergency, I represent the business, not my employees. They don’t want that stress, they don’t want the responsibility. There are perfectly good reasons that more people work for someone rather than starting a business of their own.

Paying off a house is a contractual transaction. You and a bank agree to terms beforehand. A house is a static economic good, a business is dynamic. They aren’t comparable in the sense you described.

A business of your own is indeed an investment. Profits are simply the way to realize a return on your original investment, usually reinvestment is what occurs if one is trying to build/scale the business. Reinvestment manifests in many different ways, profit-sharing being one of them.

Most of the great luxuries we enjoy today by way of goods, services, and inventions exist within the context of capitalism. I’m sure we disagree there.

I wouldn’t ever claim 100% credit for a successful business, obviously. It takes many different people and skills to build and scale a successful business model, and then a little luck on top of that. What is interesting is that this tiny little niche of a business would nonetheless not exist if it wasn’t for the work and risk I put forth and continue to put forth. Fact is, if I go under tomorrow (for any reason), my crew will have new jobs at a new company within days while I’m left picking up the pieces.

I know I didn’t directly address everything you mentioned. Just a few of my immediate thoughts about it. I’m not trying to defend anything, or even be right about anything in particular. It’s simply my belief that capitalism and free market (no mandates, quotas, price controls, wage controls, etc.) autonomy provides the best economic incentive structures for a prosperous economy IF the money is sound. Without sound money, we get the rot and decay that we see in developed countries these days. My opinion is that you are conflating capitalism with corrupted money and that the issues you’ve identified as being products of capitalism are indeed products of the fiat currency system.

BlueDuckBTC 2w ago 💬 1

We can disagree on the risk profile but that doesn’t change the dynamics. The owner as you say has full autonomy, therefore the workers provide labor with the trust that the owner doesn’t make a bad decision.

I understand the dynamics of bidding jobs, keeping books, and all other aspects. You need to be compensated fairly for all that you do. But, without the workers producing, it doesn’t matter what you sell, and all other aspects cease to exist. You have to have producers. That’s simple.

You are right, in some companies one person or department controls quality control. That job is not more important than any other aspect. What I have learned, there are people out there who will gladly take on more responsibilities for more compensation. If those things are too stressful for you, try giving that aspect to someone who can handle it better.

No a house loan is not different. Notice you didn’t speak to the business loan or equipment loan aspect.

No profits is not a way of realizing gains from a business. Compensation is a way of realizing a return on investment. Profits means you can charge less or pay your workers more. I know, I know, it’s not what you have been taught and you see everything as “yours”.

“We owe all innovation to capitalism” is a god like claim. You believe that without any actual evidence. A key tenet of capitalism is profit, so if someone creates something just to help themselves or others for no gain…well that’s not capitalism as an incentive. A great example of that is Bitcoin. I’m helping my friend build his house and I’m not profiting at all. Nikola Tesla invented many things he died poor and with many capitalist knives in his back. In the pre colonial Americas, the word profit nor property rights existed…there was no such thing. Humans literally existed for tens of thousands of years with profits or property rights. They made tools, harvested, produced, traded all without profits or “owners”.

You believe capitalism exist and has to because they tied it to your “freedom” and your “right”…they sold us a lie. Now you believe it, without any actual evidence except that you read it in a book.

If you go under and those who work for you don’t care…that’s probably the main reason the company folded OR you made a dumb decision. Again, if all parties have real interest in something surviving, they will all work hard to ensure it succeeds. In the book Art of War, it is stated that if you put your army in the position of life or death, you will get the most out of each fighter. Humans are badass, they are even more badass when they work together towards a common goal. Why do we seek to separate them in recent history when it comes to economic gain? That’s because it validates the entitlement of those who exploit others. Instead of us pointing out greed as bad, they say “but you can be greedy too”. It’s that simple. That is capitalism.

In my opinion, you are misinterpreting free markets, profits, and the abundance of history that humans have. You won’t believe it today but I want you to remember I told you this…capitalism created fiat currency in order to profit more. When that clicks, it will all make sense, even the corruption of other social structures like governing bodies being corrupted by greed. #bitcoin #nostr #capitalismsucks

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Wizdumb 2w ago 💬 1

You are making a lot of assumptions about me, and boxing me in quite a bit. I’m not some ardent defender of capitalism, generally. I’m an ardent defender of property rights and individualism/autonomy.

The predominate concepts that I believe apply most to economic systems are incentive structures, scarcity, and human behavior. If those three things get plugged in as variables into any of or mix of economic systems that humans have applied in complex markets, capitalism by comparison has had objectively better results than collectivism. Which I’m not saying that you’re even advocating for, I understand your position is a bit more nuanced, as is mine.

Pure capitalism has ills and faults, too. 💯 acknowledge that. But the idealism you are projecting hasn’t occurred yet in a complex human society with enough historical record and/or participants to contrast it with say capitalism or socialism.

I don’t believe that profit is synonymous with exploitation as you do, we definitely part company there. Having a higher output than input when providing a good or service aligns the incentives to continue to provide that good or service in a valuable and consistent manner. If that is a hallmark of capitalism then I would say that is one objectively positive aspect.

We can go on and on, ultimately we’d be talking in circles. To me, it’s all a moot issue if the money is broken, money is the foundation of the incentive to provide anything of value to the world outside of your immediate tribe. In complex systems we need a medium of exchange that fairly represents value.

If one of your contentions is that capitalism itself is the cause of the fiat system I would disagree as fiat is dependent on the power of centralization and authority, hallmarks of collectivism and communism. The capitalist ideal is that the people/market decides on what the best monetary good(s) will be, not a central/collective few.

BlueDuckBTC 2w ago

I would encourage you to explore Joseph Schumpeter and Adam Smith more. Capitalism has only one endgame, cannibalism. You are right, I will not convince you that a social species can be taken advantage of by capitalistic competition where contrary to what you say, it’s sole purpose is profit a centralization of capital. You and every capitalistic writer from the past will not convince me that the next step in capitalism or society has a whole is a stronger social economic construct. I was once a very strong advocate of capitalism…until I started to studied history with a broader mind.

I wish you well and apologize if you felt labeled in any negative way.