The downside is that we're funneling our money and information to a very small number of people. As the imbalance grows, there is less and less reason for the rich people to give a shit about what the not so rich people think or want for their lives. Short term, woo hoo. Long term, not great.
I agree that it feels wrong, but I am increasingly unconvinced that it's a problem (or at least: I don't know what the problem exactly is). Life around the world keeps improving on most every metric, while all these mega corps keep growing. I am not saying they are the reason this is happening, or that it would be even better without them — I don't know in either case.
What makes me suspicious: Is there a certain number on their balance sheets at which the system turns sour, when the trap snaps? Because the numbers all seem absurdly large already and keep increasing. Am I to believe that it will all come down after the next trillion or 10? I mean, it's not unthinkable of course, I just don't know why. Even from the most cynical view: Why would they want to crash a system where everything is going great for them?
So I do wonder: Are large amounts of wealth in the hands of a few per se a real world problem for us or is our notion of what the number means, what it does to or for us, simply off?
This is so sad. I read this comment a few hours ago and keep thinking about it. You seem to be making a relatively good effort to understand but coming up short.
Our society is so cooked, man. We don’t even realize how over it is, and even people genuinely trying to understand are not able to.
Well, why don't you try to explain (since you seem to give me credit for being interested)? Right now I am slightly confused about how this is the best response you came up with, after a few hours of thinking (on-and-off at best, I am sure) about it.
They don't need to care. Nobody cares. That's not a special feature of corps though: Most employees to not care about the company they work for. They do not care about their employers. They do not care about the product they are building.
What I am asking to interview this viewpoint is: Why will it be a problem when a company reaches a certain size? If they have no other goal than making money, are the biggest assholes of all time, and make money through customers, unless you can actually simply extort customers (monopolies), they will continue to want to do stuff that makes customers want to give them more money. Why would that fail as soon as the company goes from 1 trillion to 2 trillion?
I completely agree: The amount of money that corps wield feels obscene. I am just looking for a clear explanation of what the necessary failure mode is at a certain size, because that is something that we generally just assume. Unequal distribution is the problem and it's always doom, but that clashes with ever improving living standards on any metric I think is interesting.
So I think it's a fair question how and when the collapse is going to happen, to understand if that was even a reasonable assumption to begin with. I have my doubts.
The issue is one of power imbalance. It's not a new observation to say that money basically equates to power. The more money you have, the more influence you have, the more you get your way. And the more you don't have to care about what anyone else thinks. You become completely detached from the needs and wants of the majority around you because as long as your needs and wants are being met you have no reason to work with anyone else. They need you more than you need them OR you have so much more money/power that you don't really need to account for their well-being at all. There is no material difference to you at a certain point. And the gap between who Has and who Has Not is getting larger. By a lot.
How can the world continue to function this way if fewer of us have so much wealth that the rest of us effectively have no say in how the world works?
