On Friday, July 26, 2002, at 12:19 PM, James Rogers wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-07-26 at 11:50, Ian Andrew Bell wrote:
>> The ruling class, whether you define them as government or business
>> (what's the difference?) knows full well where that money is.  It's
>> lining their pockets, buying their hobby ranches, and financing
>> their private jets.
>>
>> Neither has any interest in the welfare of the working class.
>
> Yes, and the working class deserves what it gets, and possibly not even
> that.  For the most part, people become wealthy by not being stupid.  I
> always thought "not being stupid (most of the time)" was a fairly low
> bar, but apparently most people can't even manage that.
This isn't particularly well-founded logic.  What you're saying is
that "most rich people are smart" and that the latter is causal to
the former.  By implication, then, you would say that "most poor
people are stupid".  This is true, statistically, because most
people are poor and most people are also stupid.  However there's
nothing to indicate a causal link there.  So being smart isn't the
only mechanical requirement to eternal wealth because, obviously,
most of the members of this list would be rich.
Being smart, for example, has made Stephen Hawking famous and
respected, but he's not particularly rich.  Jennifer Lopez is by
all accounts a complete moron.  In fact, spend a weekend in Beverly
Hills and you will encounter vast numbers of people who are
profoundly stupid driving Rolls Royces and shopping at PRADA.
The working class IS the market and the working class IS where
wealth is created.  The working class makes long-distance calls,
buys food processors and computers and clothes, and attaches the
value to goods which allows them to be commodified.  The working
class saves money, buys Retirement Savings Plans, and invests in
mutual funds which increases the flow of capital through the
investment funnel.
The economic system of the first world is designed to strike a
delicate balance between incentivizing the ruling class to support
wealth-expanding through technological innovation or the
development of new markets.  At the 100,000 foot level, recessions
and depressions are created when more wealth is sucked from the
whirlpool than can be supported by the working class through
investment and consumption.
And the people draining the hot tub are the folks in the ruling
class -- people like Ken Lay, Dick Cheney, Bernie Ebbers, et al --
and they simply got too greedy and caused a bubble in the
hydraulics that increased the pressure for a time, but ultimately
wasn't sustainable.
And the money that was lost did not come from the ruling class.  It
came from the RSP's and the Equity funds and the Investments of
individual working class -- people who believed these reports and
invested.  The wealth of the ruling class was largely pulled out by
the time such investments were exposed to the workers.
So, is the lower caste necessarily stupid for saving money or
investing in retirement plans?  I don't think so.  Are they stupid
for buying clothes and automobiles?  I don't think so.
At the granular level, the notion that "most rich people are rich
because they're smart" is so anecdotal and naive that it's not
worth arguing about, so I won't.  Still, a compelling point worth
some clarification.
-Ian.
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork