I don’t care if I am right or wrong. There is no such thing as objective truth.
The same system that you are blaming for being unsupportive provides employment and livelihood for many rich and poor people. Poor people with skills and determination thrives. The rest is up to you. They can’t spoon feed you all the time. Just as much as you have the right, you have duties too.
You work, you earn. You earn, you eat and live. Simple as that.
What about all of those people who earn without working? Like, it’s literally what ALL financial independence literature says to do: don’t work for money, make your money work for you.
So a) you admit the point of capitalism is not to work for money but rather to stop working for money and b) every parent that works hard to make sure their kid gets more financial security at the start of their life reduces the amount of work their kids need to do and c) at the upper end of that spectrum, where parents buy their children rental properties or set them up with trust funds, is filled with all of the wealthiest children who, in fact, do not work for their money.
You know exactly how the system works because you have been studying it in order to make yourself financially independent but you fail to reconcile reality with your ideology.
The hardest workers under capitalism make the least - the parents raising kids while working two jobs. Manual labor jobs almost always pay less than bank jobs, and they require longer hours. Think about all the people you have ever met who are on disability leave - they worked in office jobs making $150k/year? No. They worked manual labor jobs for significantly less pay, longer hours, and their bodies are now wrecked because of it. Meanwhile the real estate agents who work part time in the richest parts of the country are pulling in a couple million, have almost zero risk to their bodies, and are in a position to get the absolute best deals on rental properties.
Money is totally unrelated to work except for a very tiny sliver of the spectrum. The biggest factor in your money is your position in the economy - which you first inherit from birth, and then navigate based on the means your family had to support you, and then navigate based on the network you were able to cultivate during the time your family supported you, and finally based on the network your were able to cultivate in your early career.
If you’re born into wealth, you already have the money, you don’t have to work. You are in position. You can work, but it’s not required, and the work you are likely to do will be far far easier than manual labor jobs and will pay far far more because of your positioning.
If you are born into poverty, not only will you be working to support your family by the time your 16, your family will be struggling to support you and you will lack the opportunities to build the network required to land high paying low effort jobs, which the rich child has in spades.
You don’t want to work hard anyway. If you did, you would be out there digging ditches with a mattock or laying concrete or doing manual demolition. Not for you. You’re going to work smarter, not harder. And when you have some money, you’ll use it to make sure it starts working for you so that you don’t have to work.
That’s the whole goddamned point of the system. Everyone is incentived to find a way to stop working. Doesn’t that seem like a contradiction to you? That the only way (in your words) to make money is to work for it and yet the whole point of having enough money is to not work? Really makes you think. Maybe the people with money aren’t actually working for it. Maybe the money they have is working for them and they’re doing whatever the hell they want because they love it and it’s rewarding and it doesn’t require them to work 14-hour days 6-days a week to put food on the table and raise their kids. Maybe in fact the people with the most money actually work the least.
I don’t care if I am right or wrong. There is no such thing as objective truth.
The same system that you are blaming for being unsupportive provides employment and livelihood for many rich and poor people. Poor people with skills and determination thrives. The rest is up to you. They can’t spoon feed you all the time. Just as much as you have the right, you have duties too.
You work, you earn. You earn, you eat and live. Simple as that.
What about all of those people who earn without working? Like, it’s literally what ALL financial independence literature says to do: don’t work for money, make your money work for you.
You have to work for money before you have enough money to work for you.
So a) you admit the point of capitalism is not to work for money but rather to stop working for money and b) every parent that works hard to make sure their kid gets more financial security at the start of their life reduces the amount of work their kids need to do and c) at the upper end of that spectrum, where parents buy their children rental properties or set them up with trust funds, is filled with all of the wealthiest children who, in fact, do not work for their money.
You know exactly how the system works because you have been studying it in order to make yourself financially independent but you fail to reconcile reality with your ideology.
The hardest workers under capitalism make the least - the parents raising kids while working two jobs. Manual labor jobs almost always pay less than bank jobs, and they require longer hours. Think about all the people you have ever met who are on disability leave - they worked in office jobs making $150k/year? No. They worked manual labor jobs for significantly less pay, longer hours, and their bodies are now wrecked because of it. Meanwhile the real estate agents who work part time in the richest parts of the country are pulling in a couple million, have almost zero risk to their bodies, and are in a position to get the absolute best deals on rental properties.
Money is totally unrelated to work except for a very tiny sliver of the spectrum. The biggest factor in your money is your position in the economy - which you first inherit from birth, and then navigate based on the means your family had to support you, and then navigate based on the network you were able to cultivate during the time your family supported you, and finally based on the network your were able to cultivate in your early career.
If you’re born into wealth, you already have the money, you don’t have to work. You are in position. You can work, but it’s not required, and the work you are likely to do will be far far easier than manual labor jobs and will pay far far more because of your positioning.
If you are born into poverty, not only will you be working to support your family by the time your 16, your family will be struggling to support you and you will lack the opportunities to build the network required to land high paying low effort jobs, which the rich child has in spades.
You don’t want to work hard anyway. If you did, you would be out there digging ditches with a mattock or laying concrete or doing manual demolition. Not for you. You’re going to work smarter, not harder. And when you have some money, you’ll use it to make sure it starts working for you so that you don’t have to work.
That’s the whole goddamned point of the system. Everyone is incentived to find a way to stop working. Doesn’t that seem like a contradiction to you? That the only way (in your words) to make money is to work for it and yet the whole point of having enough money is to not work? Really makes you think. Maybe the people with money aren’t actually working for it. Maybe the money they have is working for them and they’re doing whatever the hell they want because they love it and it’s rewarding and it doesn’t require them to work 14-hour days 6-days a week to put food on the table and raise their kids. Maybe in fact the people with the most money actually work the least.
Some people have schizophrenia, shithead