10A,

core principle of capitalism is competition, but competitions inherently have winners.

This is false. A broad class of competitions do not have winners. Only zero-sum games have winners. The economy is not a zero sum game. Every participant adds value.

For instance if somebody wanted to start up a new business to compete with google, at a minimum they would need several billion dollars to have a reasonable chance of success. Google has such a huge market share and is so well established that it would take decades for any new company to put an actual dent in google's market share.

Oh yeah? May I introduce you to Gabriel Weinberg, who started a Google competitor in his basement with a $0 investment, which now earns $25 million annually.

And the most frequent cause of failure is lack of cash, which definitely ties into what I've been saying.

It's true, but most successful entrepreneurs learn from previous failures, so many of those failed companies generally result in eventual success.

Sure, it's a subjective phrase ["livable wage"], and I would personally like to see it added and defined within a new amendment to the constitution, though it probably would never happen

I've occasionally thought it would be nice to have a website where anyone could post "bills" they wish were actual laws, and other users could vote on them. It'd be fun. Not that I really think we need any more laws. I just wonder what people would come up with.

As for an actual definition, a living wage should be defined as a wage that is sufficient to raise a family on, with adequate housing and food. A living wage should be a basic but decent wage for a family.

You'd struggle to transform that into a legally reliable definition. Does it include iPads for the kids? How about the cost of pet grooming? Vacations for the whole family to the Bahamas every couple of months? Where exactly do you draw the line? Again, it was commonplace for most people to grow their own food in the not too distant past, and we lived simple lives. Isn't a living wage, then, $0?

I would also like to point out that you seem to have missed my point about the lack of freedom through vertical mobility.

I didn't miss it. I just skipped the reply. Because I see plenty of evidence that vertical mobility is alive and well. You can deny it all you'd like, but there are so many rags-to-riches stories. Maybe you don't hear about them much because they're mostly Republican.

Also you can't be happy if you can't afford food and shelter.

Jesus could.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • conservative@lemmy.world
  • ngwrru68w68
  • rosin
  • GTA5RPClips
  • osvaldo12
  • love
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • khanakhh
  • everett
  • kavyap
  • mdbf
  • DreamBathrooms
  • thenastyranch
  • magazineikmin
  • anitta
  • InstantRegret
  • normalnudes
  • tacticalgear
  • cubers
  • ethstaker
  • modclub
  • cisconetworking
  • Durango
  • provamag3
  • tester
  • Leos
  • megavids
  • JUstTest
  • All magazines