I can only answer as capitalist. FIRE relies on accumulated interest. For workers it should be the same if 10 billionaires or 100,000 FIRE investors own their companies.
UBI should be fairer.
Both scenarios are the same. Work 20 years hard and then stop working.
The FIRE owner have an interest in low wages for the workers whereas in UBI, more income for workers could mean more to be shared.
That’s where I say you are a lemmy dancing to the music.
You are lamenting the current system. You believe there is a free housing market when there is none. You think of the current system when I argue that voting must be used to make a change.
The system is not working because the lemmies are dancing. Not believing in change is the music.
Let’s call the capitalists on the yachts billionaires.
I am defending the capitalistic view that markets are key to wealth distribution. Socialists and communists agree. That’s why they want to replace them.
My point is that there needs to be competition on all markets. There must be enough housing that rent becomes cheap.
For that to happen, lemmies have to vote for politicians who change zoning laws to allow cheap housing.
Instead I see lemmies having fun with revolutions, new technologies and debates about the inclusion of anarchists. Those are all beautiful dancing partners but they won’t reduce rent because there won’t be a revolution.
The capitalists invest their profits in new ventures. Good capitalists choose often what is needed, bad capitalists constantly lose money and stop being capitalists.
You want to reward good decisions. So those with profitable investments should get all returns so that they can make more good investments.
So don’t set a limit but tax their income proportionally.
One person has a limit to the complexity that they can control. You need the masses and a working state to control other billionaires. Only then will you be able reach new levels of complex production processes that allow to do new things.
Of course, for some it is fulfilling to just be at the top.
Does this help you to understand the why? Trauma is such a loaded word that any official definition is strongly limited in its expressiveness. Where can I find the definitions that work?
If it is that dire then the reality is that if you don’t call, the children will die. But it’s not awkward because you will never know if you don’t use the service.
The third world only earns more if we buy services back.
If you feel bad that the family starves you can still pay more. But people understand PPP. Your life will be worse than theirs. You paid for chips while they had a real meal.
But you have a new party with better politics. Otherwise you argue that Democrats and Republicans already represent exactly the will of the population.