Re: Re: Personal Theory. Further explanations


Hi!

I appreciated your answer. It's comment will be the occasion to go further in explaining my theories.

You said "It was my ideas and my love for rare coins that helped me make the money. People should be rewarded on their thoughts/actions/ideas, not just brute labor."

Even if "brute labor" is not the most important factor in the processus of creating goods, it is the most difficult part, the most unwanted, the most dangerous, but is still fundamentally necessary. Yes, "people should be rewarded for their thoughts/actions/ideas", but I refuse to accept that they should be more rewarded that "brute labor." Nobody wants hard physical work when they can make money easier just sitting in an office ("I didn't work hard at making $10 million").
The truth is, they don't often have the choice.

You also said, " encourages thinking/creativity/invention - this is what creates jobs.".

That's true. The problem is, it also encourages pollution, low wages and.... UNEMPLOYMENT !!!

This is a major error to consider that it creates jobs.
In dictatorial-communist countries, the unemployment was one of the lowest ever seen. If unemployment is the problem, I have a solution: make a law that request that everybody must work anywhere, for example in agriculture, with their hands. There would be no unemployment. But the population will soon die, for lack of basic goods.

"Bill Gates is often criticized for having Billions and Billions. (...) Plus, he just gave away over 2 billion dollars to a lot of respectable charities" I have some doubt that he gave much of his own money for respectable charities groups, even if it is tax-deductible.

I think that the reality is very different. He has built his monopoly business, not with imagination (Microsoft is well know to have copied on Apple), but because of highly aggressive marketing. The goal: eliminating the concurrence, gaining prestige and profits. The way: massive advertisement to badly influence people, low wages, unfair practices that avoid concurrence, etc... nothing really positive for the society. Is it ethical to give little money for good purpose while stealing the people on the other hand?

Ideas and muscle made progress, but muscle cost more to the society in terms of efforts, pain and danger.
Therefore, muscle (unwanted difficult physical work) should be replaced as much as possible with ideas and machines (easy-high qualified jobs).

Peace & Unity & Esperanto.

Vincent Mandrilly