>>So, yeah, that's what led up to October, 1929.<<
That's why history makes me pessimistic about much contemporary news. Too much sounds like what preceded this or that howling disaster.
>>How does it not occur to wealthy people that whatever a person with one billion dollars can do with a second billion dollars could be done better by a million people with a thousand dollars each?<<
Because they aren't thinking about what could be done; they're thinking about what they want. If you gave me a billion dollars, I'd dig out of the hole, secure a future income, and spend the rest on making the world a better place. That is not how most rich people handle money.
To be fair, much can be done with a big chunk that can't be done with smaller chunks. The question is: will the billionaire actually DO something with that second billion that couldn't be done with smaller chunks, and if so, will that create a better benefit than the result of all those smaller chunks helping the economy to cycle? Usually, no. But once in a while rich people do something amazingly useful. Right now, I think we're at (past, actually) the point where what could be done justifies draining funds what what NEEDS to be done. The current allocation of wealth does not produce a functional economy, which is bad for everyone.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dancing_serpent
Yes...
Date: 2011-02-25 08:05 pm (UTC)That's why history makes me pessimistic about much contemporary news. Too much sounds like what preceded this or that howling disaster.
>>How does it not occur to wealthy people that whatever a person with one billion dollars
can do with a second billion dollars
could be done better by a million people with a thousand dollars each?<<
Because they aren't thinking about what could be done; they're thinking about what they want. If you gave me a billion dollars, I'd dig out of the hole, secure a future income, and spend the rest on making the world a better place. That is not how most rich people handle money.
To be fair, much can be done with a big chunk that can't be done with smaller chunks. The question is: will the billionaire actually DO something with that second billion that couldn't be done with smaller chunks, and if so, will that create a better benefit than the result of all those smaller chunks helping the economy to cycle? Usually, no. But once in a while rich people do something amazingly useful. Right now, I think we're at (past, actually) the point where what could be done justifies draining funds what what NEEDS to be done. The current allocation of wealth does not produce a functional economy, which is bad for everyone.