undefined | Better HN

0 pointsyummyfajitas13y ago0 comments

I made no claims about creating jobs or growth. I rarely make such arguments, since a) I think a focus on creating jobs is nonsensical and b) empirical evidence showing stuff causes growth is virtually nonexistent.

My claim is much milder. As a billionaire, basically everything you have is invested. If he has $100m less, then $100m less is invested.

Investment has a chance of benefiting me. Consumption by the leisure class (i.e., beneficiaries of government redistribution) does not. FlyinRyan is simply incorrect in his claims.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

flyinRyan13y ago· 2 in thread

What a bunch of nonsense. A billionaire investing millions has virtually no chance of helping you. The only conceivable way he can help you is by participating in an IPO so that particular company gets an injection of cash to use to hire more people, etc. But virtually all trading that will go on with his/her millions/billions is buying and selling of stock that IPO'ed long ago and no longer bring the issuer any money at all.

The kind of investment the billionaire is doing is zero-sum in nature and doesn't help anyone but them.

It's hilarious that you imagine some billionaire playing the stock market has more value to you than people spending money on products (that you could be making). The 80's called and asked for their misconceptions back.

yummyfajitasOP13y ago

I'm confused - people consuming helps me because maybe I can work hard to enable their consumption? Huh? Explain how this helps me again?

flyinRyan13y ago

You're being thick. People consuming creates a market. You have the opportunity to capture a part of that market to make money. This is the entire point of capitalism. You somehow imagine that fucking billionaires investing in funds is more beneficial to you than the actual markets? Take a step back and think about what you're saying.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse