And especially with small business owners, it’s not just risk at startup. It’s risk every day you’re operating.Risk. Capital investment. Etc. etc. etc. COH isn't wildly off here. The owner has taken all the risk
Yep. Personally guaranteeing the firm 6 figure LOC to meet payrolls sobers you up really fast.
To be clear, I'm not denying the reality of private ownership and capitalism, or saying it's a bad or unfair system. I'm just taking issue with CO.H's assertion that it somehow exemplifies fidelity to the principle that someone should be able to keep the fruits of his own labor. That's a clever line, and it's perhaps a worthy sentiment, but the system we have now doesn't fail it any less than, say, socialism would. From the Roman slave economy to manorialism to feudalism to mercantilism to capitalism to socialism to communism, our planet has never actually developed an economic system that genuinely allowed people to keep the fruits of their own labor. Hell, I'm not sure it's even possible to craft a system that would.
Didnt have to clarify. You limited your statement clearly enough.And especially with small business owners, it’s not just risk at startup. It’s risk every day you’re operating.Risk. Capital investment. Etc. etc. etc. COH isn't wildly off here. The owner has taken all the risk
Yep. Personally guaranteeing the firm 6 figure LOC to meet payrolls sobers you up really fast.
To be clear, I'm not denying the reality of private ownership and capitalism, or saying it's a bad or unfair system. I'm just taking issue with CO.H's assertion that it somehow exemplifies fidelity to the principle that someone should be able to keep the fruits of his own labor. That's a clever line, and it's perhaps a worthy sentiment, but the system we have now doesn't fail it any less than, say, socialism would. From the Roman slave economy to manorialism to feudalism to mercantilism to capitalism to socialism to communism, our planet has never actually developed an economic system that genuinely allowed people to keep the fruits of their own labor. Hell, I'm not sure it's even possible to craft a system that would.
F
What you say can be true, AND the system of trading off we have can also be the best system we have and so should keep it.
The reason I posted what I did is to highlight what I think is a failing of economic thinking among many socialists today. They don’t give enough credit and consideration to risk taking and have no real way to account for intellectual labor’s value add.
I'm just taking issue with CO.H's assertion that [capitalism] somehow exemplifies fidelity to the principle that someone should be able to keep the fruits of his own labor.
Strongly disagree. Privately held capital/property is the logical end result keeping the fruits of our labor. The post revolutionary USA was definitely an economic system the recognized this and encouraged it. Our political journey for the last 250 years involved issues about how, why, and to what extent, we should move away from that. A functioning social safety net is an obvious example most of us will agree with that. Other examples raise more questions and conflict.
To also be clear; my comparison was between collectiveism and keeping the fruits of our labor. The Jamestown Colony is an obvious example of the failure of the former.
Socialism doesn’t structurally fail the idea of keeping the fruits of our labor. But it does substantially diminish opportunities to do so. Even China recognizes this reality and the benefits of economic freedom with its establishment of free enterprise zones.
The reason I posted what I did is to highlight what I think is a failing of economic thinking among many socialists today.
I’m not sure we should call that thinking socialism. American “socialism” isn’t traditional socialism as practiced in Cuba, NK and other places. In stead, our socialism is a grievance-based ideology that arises from dislike and distrust of highly successful people and businesses. This leads to ongoing cries for “fair share” taxation, crushing regulations in the name of fairness, wealth taxes, reparations, and more. The objective of American Socialism seems to be destruction of success without building a true socialist system.
When I was in the corporate world 20+ years ago (pharma) the main fruits of my labor were drug patents. We were required to sign away all patent rights to our employer as standard business. Discover a billion dollar drug? No royalties for you, ever. Tough. That's how it is.
In academia, though, there is the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, which allows universities, non-profit institutions, and certain small businesses to retain title (ownership), patent, and commercialize inventions developed under federally funded research programs. By enabling the transfer of technology from lab to market, it aims to foster innovation, boost the U.S. economy, and promote public access to research outcomes. The innovators may realize royalty streams from patent licensing and even a negotiated percentage of drug profits. Some of the fruits of innovative labor thus remain with the innovators.
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
Latest Post: Iran War Has Started Our newest member: Richard Haynes Recent Posts Unread Posts
