Why does Leo stay in America?

[DocWatts]

5 minutes ago, Hello from Russia said:

Ehhh, dude, you you demonize money & money holders too much

Unless you're highly unethical you won't really make it far in business without providing a lot of value to people. And when you do - you contribute to society directly and kinda deserve your money, really. Now you can create even more shit with it, which usually means - more value to people 

I'm really not demonizing the wealthy, and I realize that this is a Systemic issue rather than any moral failure on the part of individuals. I also understand that wealthy people create value for society, but so do middle and working class people. Try running a company like Ford without anyone on your assembly lines or answering the phones, and see how far that gets you.

The reason why I care about this issue is because there's a basic (and important) fairness principle being violated here. A small handful of people shouldn't own more wealth than the bottom half of the whole society, especially when a significant portion of people aren't able to meet thier basic needs (food, housing, transportation, education, health care). Right now in America, the richest country in the world, around 40 million people are facing eviction during a pandemic.

In addition to that, the vast wealth inequalities that exist are distorting and eroding Democracy, since the wealthy are able to buy thier way into getting favorable legislation passed, and furthermore they're able to isolate themselves from the problems of society.

None of this is abstract, it effects people in very real ways. It's not hard to imagine a world where millionaires exist, but differences in wealth and opportunity aren't so vast that people aren't able to meet thier basic needs in a supposedly developed country.

[Leo Gura]

8 hours ago, DocWatts said:

should the creative aspirations for one individual take precedent over many more people whose basic needs aren't being met

It's not so simple.

The creative aspirations of ambitious people are what leads, employs, feeds, and aids thousands of others.

Progressive projects require lots of capital and vision.

[Girzo]

I think some of you guys are missing the point. One can be paying themselves humbly and live simply, while still having a lot of capital on command. For example, let's say I have a business and am a humble yogi. I pay myself a maximum of $2000 per month and the rest of the profit stays in the business and can be used towards realizing the purpose of the organization.

Just because my personal income is low doesn't mean the company has to have low margins, etc, it can still be a very profitable venture. Yet, the extra profit wouldn't be used towards satisfying personal needs, other than doing good in the world of course. 

And yes, one still has to be careful to make sure that his business is doing more good to the world by fulfilling its mission than harm by extracting the resources of people and the planet.

Edited January 2, 2021 by Girzo

[DocWatts]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

It's not so simple.

The creative aspirations of ambitious people are what leads, employs, feeds, and aids thousands of others.

Progressive projects require lots of capital and vision.

And in a healthy, well functioning system there's no reason why a society couldn't foster and support entrepreneurship while also putting rules in place to make sure that the accumulation of capital doesn't destabilize society and cause harm to other people.

Edited January 2, 2021 by DocWatts

[Leo Gura]

5 hours ago, DocWatts said:

no reason why a society couldn't foster and support entrepreneurship

How would you determine who deserves the entrepreneurship capital when capital is finite?

[Hello from Russia]

11 hours ago, Girzo said:

I think some of you guys are missing the point. One can be paying themselves humbly and live simply, while still having a lot of capital on command. For example, let's say I have a business and am a humble yogi. I pay myself a maximum of $2000 per month and the rest of the profit stays in the business and can be used towards realizing the purpose of the organization.

Just because my personal income is low doesn't mean the company has to have low margins, etc, it can still be a very profitable venture. Yet, the extra profit wouldn't be used towards satisfying personal needs, other than doing good in the world of course. 

And yes, one still has to be careful to make sure that his business is doing more good to the world by fulfilling its mission than harm by extracting the resources of people and the planet.

But that's exactly what good entrepreneurs do. They pay themselves like 1-5% of their revenue and the rest they invest in their creations further.

The $2000 is bullshit. You need money to build a good infrastructure for your own well-being and creativity. You can scrape by at $2000 of course, but why would you do that if you can invest like $20k per month in yourself and buy yourself the best food, best nicities, best home facilities, good home location so it further feeds up in your creativity and you become even more creative?

And sometimes it's not even about this basic stuff, but about some ART for $1m that will be inspiring the heck out of you to be even more creative and innovative. Would that be a bad investment? Rich people have more access to this stuff and they  generally are doing a good job utilizing it

Try to really look from the rich guy's point of view. There are some good channels/books/biographies available nowadays that help you to see behind of scenes what goes into billionaires guy mind and how he structure he lives. I'd really recommend you to study these and then judge. And don't just watch famous "celebrity"-businessmen that are trending on youtube like Elon Musk. Go study those that no one knows the fuck about them, yet they have $100m-1b-10b+ net worth. Most of these guys don't clown around on youtube and you won't find them there easily 

Edited January 2, 2021 by Hello from Russia

[Hello from Russia]

Satisfying your needs = helping the world

You can't really help the world effectively when your needs aren't satisfied properly

[Girzo]

@Hello from Russia we differ in values, for sure, haha. No-one forces to live you in the States, in most countries in the world $2000 is an income level of a programmer or a doctor with a few years of experience, far away from scraping by. If you up it to $4-5k there's really no reason to have more. It's enough to have family, car, modern housing, vacations abroad, etc. You don't get qualitatively better stuff for more, just more pricey.

You call bullshit on my desire to live frugally and say that an $1 million in art is a good investment purely for the reason of inspiring one self. I call bullshit on that, there is no way that you having a $1m piece of art would do more good in the world than donating $998 000 to a non-profit fighting malaria.

[Girzo]

3 hours ago, Hello from Russia said:

They pay themselves like 1-5% of their revenue and the rest they invest in their creations further.

You have said that and later talked about ultra-wealthy billionaires and multi-millionaires. I am not sure if you meant for that statement to apply for them too, or just normal entrepreneurs. I will assume you did.

Yes they pay themselves 1-5%, but give out to charitable cases only like 0.1%, the rest of the money they use to lobby, stay in power and keep their fortunes intact. There are statistics that relatively billionaires are donating to charitable causes much less of their wealth than the poorer citizens.

 

[Hulia]

@Hello from Russia $20k per month in yourself??? 

It means I have to do shopping almost all the time! I am too lazy for this. If I had millions on my account I would lay on sofa, read books and drink tea, and do yoga inbetween much more than I do presently. I would probably desocialize completely.

So maybe it´s ok that I have to earn my living - I don´t loose contact to other people, to the outside world. Monday will come and with it all the voices in my headset. 

[Hello from Russia]

@Girzo That's because you don't see a bigger picture

Ohhh, you guys have such a lousy attitude towards money and wealth, no wonder most of the forum struggles in that domain, I'm out of the topic. If you want to make $2k-3k a month for the rest of your life and donate everything else - it's up to you, man. Just don't frame it as a selfless act or that you're doing something noble or wise. You'd give much more value to the world by making more, spending\investing in yourself more, and creating more shit in the world that other people love or need, staying overly lean is a common noobie mistake

And yeah, you're right about values, I don't really share stage green beliefs about money

@Hulia When you're that rich you don't have to make all these purchases yourself, you can hire a chef who would buy quality food and then make everything for you & for your family

+ It's way more about buying quality products, than just sheer volume of stuff.

And it's not about shopping at all. It's about you trading money as a RESOURCE for different RESOURCES - time, knowledge, health, transportation, etc. 

Edited January 2, 2021 by Hello from Russia

[Girzo]

2 minutes ago, Hello from Russia said:

That's because you don't see a bigger picture

I see an extra-big picture and...

3 minutes ago, Hello from Russia said:

If you want to make $2k-3k a month for the rest of your life

...that's why I want to live simply. I know where this money ultimately comes from, it's either raping the Earth or your fellow humans. There's a small percentage of conscious profitable businesses, and most multi-million dollar comapnies are not that.

They are keeping in place a system that pushes down wages of everday people, forces them to work 8 hours per day when we already have the technology to lower that to 4 hours per day and exploits the commons, resources we all own collectively.

I aim for impact not personal income. Being uber-wealthy is not sustainable in the long-run.

What would do more good in the world, funnelling the income of the company to your own personal account or using it allow your employees work shorter hours, freeing up their time for creative endeavours? I believe in our collective power, individuals are over-rated

[DocWatts]

9 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

How would you determine who deserves the entrepreneurship capital when capital is finite?

Less a matter of who 'deserves' capital, and more about making sure that the way capital is obtained and used isn't destructive. And also about using societal resources in a more equitable way, including giving more people the ability to become entrepreneurs and start businesses.

How many more people would be willing to become entrepreneurs if Health Care wasn't tied to a wage slave job, and if some sort of Universal Basic Income program was implemented which people could fall back on? I know quite a few people who Freelance for a living, and the fact that Health Care is basically unaffordable if its not being subsidized by an employer is a huge hardship for people trying to break away from Wage Slavery.

What if we stopped subsidizing mature businesses (such as the fossil fuel industry), and instead used that money on Grants and low interest Loans for entrepreneurs who are just starting out, and don't have access to a ton of capital? Some priority could be given for start ups and businesses which serve a communal need, for example someone willing to open a Grocery Store in a poor neighborhood whose residents are living in a food desert. Or more generally, more support could be given to people who are willing to invest in and bring economic opportunities to poor communities.

That's aside from the fact that the excessive accumulation of Capital among a relatively small group of people begins to damage Democracy, and makes it so that Corporations and Wealthy individuals can basically write Laws that give them unfair advantages. For the longest time you couldn't purchase a Tesla in Michigan, because the Car Dealership Lobby passed a Law targeted at Tesla, which made it illegal for direct car sales without conforming the Dealership business model.

Obviously all these problems are indicative of Late Stage Capitalism. A better system would still heavily rely on Markets to distribute Goods and Services, but in a more equitable and less destructive manner. The fact that in a Wealthy country that essentials (Health Care, Education, basic Housing) are tied to the Market is indicative of a moral failure on the part of our Society (in addition to it being unsustainable). Social Democracy or Market Socialism are possible responses to this, but a Restructuring of our Current System could be as well, though I see that as less likely due to how thoroughly Late Stage Capitalism has corrupted our Democracy in America.

Also I'm sure you know this, but it's possible to be highly critical of Capitalism, while still seeing Markets as a highly necessary and useful structure, one that could still be retained under a more humane socio-economic System.

Edited January 2, 2021 by DocWatts

[Hulia]

18 hours ago, Hello from Russia said:

You'd give much more value to the world by making more, spending\investing in yourself more, and creating more shit in the world that other people love or need, staying overly lean is a common noobie mistake

Hello from Russia, can you give an example? I don´t understand, how spending money on myself should make the world the better place?

[Hulia]

5 hours ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

I never liked the idea of having to maintain a more conscious capitalism, it doesn't eliminate the issue of third world exploitation.

Always these accusations. Why cannot 3rd world take responsibility and accept the truth: in the 1st place third world is exploited by OWN corrupted governments and not by the enemies OUTSIDE.

[Hulia]

12 hours ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

There is serious value transference and forms of modern imperialism that is preventing the development of critical infrastructure which does its part to perpetuate corruption.

This is what the corrupted governments tell their people.

[Striving for more]

Everyone is different & for whatever reasons people want to live in different places. 

I personally fucking Hate the UK, I really hate it. But it could be worse, I'd hate russia too. 

I would kill to live in America or Canada but obviously only if I had money. 

[Hello from Russia]

@Hulia Dude, are you serious?

[Leo Gura]

On 1/4/2021 at 1:08 AM, Hulia said:

Why cannot 3rd world take responsibility and accept the truth: in the 1st place third world is exploited by OWN corrupted governments and not by the enemies OUTSIDE.

It's both

[Star]

On 30/12/2020 at 11:06 AM, Vision said:

The less corrupt a country is, the easier it is to self-actualize.

I'm not saying it's wrong to live in America. But given its corruption and the option to move to less corrupt countries, why does Leo decide to stay in America? 

If you live in America, why do you stay? Have you considered moving? 

 I know what you mean... when I saw at his profil that he lives in LA... I was like..."eww"

I don't know though, I may be wrong, I've never been there... it's that I have all those stereotypes that LA is a place where a lot of supperficial people live...of course this is pure ignorance... but still... we can't get rid of stereotypical ideas easily.

Personally more  spiritual I become, less stimilations I need... So i would had prefer a cabin in the woods

Edited January 6, 2021 by Star