[extropy-chat] Bloodless Redistribution of Wealth (wasSingulartarians)

Thu Dec 29 01:52:06 UTC 2005

I must disagree.

The ultra-rich don't generate wealth to get famous, in large part. 
Indeed, most attempt to discourage such fame (Paris Hilton being a 
notable exception, but perhaps only because she shares an IQ with the 
dog in her purse).

Just look at the top 10 richest people in the world, according to Forbes 
magazine (the 2003 list is the first one I found, but the principle 
applies):

   1. William H Gates III
      <http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/10/2003/LIR.jhtml?passListId=10&passYear=2003&passListType=Person&uniqueId=BH69&datatype=Person>

   2. Warren E Buffett
      <http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/10/2003/LIR.jhtml?passListId=10&passYear=2003&passListType=Person&uniqueId=C0R3&datatype=Person>

   3. Karl & Theo Albrecht
      <http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/10/2003/LIR.jhtml?passListId=10&passYear=2003&passListType=Person&uniqueId=6WGQ&datatype=Person>

   4. Paul G Allen
      <http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/10/2003/LIR.jhtml?passListId=10&passYear=2003&passListType=Person&uniqueId=1217&datatype=Person>

   5. Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Alsaud
      <http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/10/2003/LIR.jhtml?passListId=10&passYear=2003&passListType=Person&uniqueId=0RD0&datatype=Person>

   6. Lawrence J Ellison
      <http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/10/2003/LIR.jhtml?passListId=10&passYear=2003&passListType=Person&uniqueId=JKEX&datatype=Person>

   7. Alice L Walton
      <http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/10/2003/LIR.jhtml?passListId=10&passYear=2003&passListType=Person&uniqueId=9S8R&datatype=Person>

   8. Helen R Walton
      <http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/10/2003/LIR.jhtml?passListId=10&passYear=2003&passListType=Person&uniqueId=8B88&datatype=Person>

   9. Jim C Walton
      <http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/10/2003/LIR.jhtml?passListId=10&passYear=2003&passListType=Person&uniqueId=JI38&datatype=Person>

  10. John T Walton
      <http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/10/2003/LIR.jhtml?passListId=10&passYear=2003&passListType=Person&uniqueId=GHPT&datatype=Person>

Aside from the first one, and possibly the second one, do you know what 
any of them look like?

Of course not. And if they wanted you to, you wouldn't need to see their 
faces on the currency. They'd be on every television in the world.

It's not about vanity in that superficial sense. In fact, I am pretty 
sure Bill Gates, for one, would eschew such a thing in the interests of 
modesty.

I crave money too, but it's not so I can resculpt the moon in my own 
image; it's so I can change the world and at the same time ensure 
comfort and access to the latest technological advances for myself and 
my family.

Don't confuse ego with vanity.

Joseph

Anne-Marie Taylor wrote:

> Any idea to help other people can only be beneficial. I agree that the 
> idea
> is a little "tacky", but I think it would work. Ego is what makes a person
> crave money, therefore, it would seem very likely that your idea might 
> work.
> Just an opinion
> Anna
>
> */The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com>/* wrote:
>
>
>
>     --- spike wrote:
>
>     > Do tell! Keep in mind however that the government
>     > already has such a system, which it has been
>     > struggling
>     > for years to suppress: donations to the political
>     > party of one's choice.
>
>     But donations to political parties is nowhere near the
>     same thing. It is not money being spent by the wealthy
>     for the public weal, it is instead a method by which
>     those individuals ensure that any incoming government
>     does their bidding. It is done so that government
>     caters to the interests of a small minority, often at
>     the expense of the public at large.
>
>     This ugly situation is what makes me so reluctant to
>     divulge my idea. Last thing we need is for the
>     government use this additional money to buy more
>     missiles, bombs, and bullets. Defense contracts makes
>     up the overwhelming majority of public expenditure,
>     and we spend more of our hard earned tax money on
>     these things than the rest of the world combined. Who
>     exactly is the enemy? Arabs with box cutters? Or are
>     we just trying to pick fights wherever we can?
>
>     I for one would like see us reach a point on
>     production possibilities curve that allows for more
>     butter and fewer guns. Or barring that, the goverment
>     ought to share all the guns it is hoarding with the
>     rank and file of it's citizenry. After all, I would
>     feel far ! safer and more dignified with a .45 in my
>     carry-on luggage than with some TSA mouthbreather
>     feeling me up in the airport. But I digress.
>
>     Any money raised by my idea ought to go to
>     humanitarian causes. Agencies such as the NIH, NSA,
>     NASA (especially their NEO deflection guys), Social
>     Security, Medicare, or even the National Endowment of
>     the Arts. In short, it would probably be for the best
>     if congress kept its greedy and inept mitts off of
>     this "fund".
>
>     My idea is relatively straight forward. It is based in
>     large part on my thoughts on the economic principle of
>     diminishing marginal utility. Money, like any other
>     commodity, is subject to this phenomenon. In a
>     nutshell, you have one widget, it is exceptionally
>     useful. You get a second widget and it is a little
>     less useful. If you have a hundred widgets than you
>     will probably not get much use out of your 101st
>     widget. The same would apply to money. Bill Gates's
>     first billio! n was probably very useful to him. He
>     might even have thrown a party to celebrate. His 40th
>     billion, however, he probably hardly noticed.
>
>     So if money is subject to the law of diminishing
>     marginal utility, what possible motivation is there
>     for amassing huge amounts of it? Is it simply how
>     billionaires keep "score" of who is the better at
>     playing the "game"? The problem is that what is to
>     them a "game", is to the people on the bottom rungs on
>     the social ladder, no less than life and death. So do
>     people with multiple mansions, yachts, private jets,
>     and luxury cars continue to amass personal wealth at
>     the expense of the poor because they are sadistic and
>     enjoy watching people suffer? I think not.
>
>     I think that there are several forces at work here.
>     For one thing, the structure of the economy is such
>     that it allows for a certain critical mass of wealth
>     beyond which it is very difficult to actually "spend"
>     ones money. Anythin! g one buys becomes an assett and
>     the naturally diversified investments of people that
>     are looking for something to do with their money bring
>     fairly steady returns. If they give money to charity,
>     they get some of it back in tax write-offs. In short,
>     it is difficult for the truly wealthy to "dispose" of
>     their disposable income.
>
>     Another factor is the role of money as a status
>     indicator. I believe it truly becomes how billionaires
>     establish their "pecking order" or "keep score". To
>     saddle them with with laws prohibiting them from
>     amassing further wealth would be like telling an
>     olympic runner that she is not allowed to run faster
>     than a certain speed.
>
>     In view of these thoughts that I had, my challenge was
>     to find a way to appropriate the wealth of the
>     super-wealthy without harming them or endangering
>     their hard-won social status. Short of complicated
>     reforms of the banking system and retooling the very
>     concepts of inter! est rates and insurance, the best and
>     simplest idea I could come up with was "vanity money".
>
>     The idea is similar to that of vanity license plates.
>     Every year the U.S. Treasury Department removes some
>     of the old currency from circulation and replaces it
>     with about $20 billion dollars worth of crisp new
>     bills and coins. My idea is rather simple. They say
>     the capitalists motto is "he who dies with the most
>     toys wins". I say why wait until the billionaires die
>     to tally the score? Let them enter the "hall of fame"
>     during their lifetimes and reset the "game". So we set
>     up a government service that would allow the treasury
>     department to sell off (either for exorbiantly high
>     set prices or competive auction style bids) the
>     various denominations of currency for a given year.
>     The idea being that for a few billion dollars, all the
>     bills or coins of a given denomination issued within a
>     defined time period would feature the "winner's"
>     pictu! re on it.
>
>     What greater honor could a capitalist society bestow
>     upon its most successful capitalists than to print or
>     stamp their faces on its currency? This is a positive
>     sum solution because despite the loss of a sizable
>     portion of the donors wealth there is concomitant
>     validation and possibly even increase of their
>     percieved social status. And if the money so recieved
>     is managed properly, our children get educated, our
>     elderly get their medications, and extinction from
>     plague or asteroids gets averted. It's win-win all the
>     way around.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>     The Avantguardian
>     is
>     Stuart LaForge
>     alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu
>
>     "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It
>     is the source of all true art and science. He to whom this emotion
>     is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe, is
>     as good as dead: his eyes are closed. . ."
>
>     - Albert Einstein, "What I Believe" (1930)
>
>
>
>     __________________________________________
>     Yahoo! DSL – Something to write home about.
>     Just $16.99/mo. or less.
>     dsl.yahoo.com
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     extropy-chat mailing list
>     extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>     http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Find your next car at *Yahoo! Canada Autos* <http://autos.yahoo.ca>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>  
>