In any case an investor isn't actually producing anything and I'm not convinced he deserves as much of the profit as the workers that do, especially workers in dangerous or back breaking conditions.
A worker in a company can also be an investor; they just need to buy stock. I'm taking the risk. I'm accepting the profits or losses that come with buying stock. THe worker has a fixed salary. Workers should invest more.
Who gets the better jobs is not up to the workers.
The University of Georgetown found 13 million job openings that meet the following requirements:
1) No college degree required.
2) Pays over $55K/year.
Minimum wage workers who are perminately out of school should find better paying jobs like what the University of Georgetown found.
I don't know where you get this idea but the people who earn the most do not produce anything for themselves. They only take from society.
They made the business. If it wasn't for Jeff Bezos, Amazon wouldn't exist and now we can't get cheap goods from the convenience of our home.
Even the startup capital he "risked" was mostly in the form of loans. In other words everything was given to him.
He had to pay back the loans and manage the loans well. If you think this is easy, try copying Bezos.
If you were starving and cold and alone would that just be your own problem and you wouldn't ask for or accept help?
I would get help from a church, not from the government. The church operates using funds obtained through means as consensual as religion it's self. The government forces you to pay money to them. Homeless people can use private churches all they want; using the government is theft.
They are only rich in the first place because of generations of colonialism and exploitation.
Jeff Bezos never colonized. He didn't exploit anyone, otherwise he couldn't get his business so successful.
No one needs more money than they can reasonably spend in thirty lifetimes.
There is a good chance that you make more than you need to live in this lifetime. Are we going to take all your excess funds and give it to children in Africa? I think your dodging the question.
F you think it would cost someone as much to go from being a billionaire to being merely a millionaire than for a person with a minimum wage job to give up all of their income then you clearly are a little out of touch with the consequences of being poor.
Most people don't work minimum wage jobs.
Lets say you make $60/year (average US salary). You need $30K/year to stay alive. So that leaves you with $30K/year. Are we going to force you to give all that money to strangers in Africa? Of course not; that would be theft.
Lets say you make $100 million/year. You need $30K/year to stay alive. So that leaves you with $100M/year. Are we going to force you to give all that money to strangers in Africa? Of course not; that would be theft.
Most of the indicators of whether a child will grow up to be wealthy are arbitrary, as in beyond that child's control. Things like being white and a man and most importantly being born into wealth.
If this was the case, then Jeff Bezos would have comparably rich sibilings. After all, they are all white, Mark Bezos is a man. They were all born into the same level of wealth. Yet Bezos was richest because he contributed the most to society.
Blacks tend to be less sucessful because they aim for different things than whites. Females tend to be less sucessful because they tend to aim for different things than men. If a black woman wants to be sucessful, she can merely copy what Bezos did with a different industry and she can hopefully get there.
But different races and different genders want different things. For instance, blacks and females tend to be more family oriented than white males, so white males tend to be more sucessful and blacks and females tend to have stronger family bonds.