Corporate culture is based on constant growth and ever increasing profit margins. Eventually they’ll amass so much of the wealth that most of the lower class won’t be able to purchase anything other than essentials like food.
No new cars, no tech gadgets, no fancy dinners, no vacations, no disposable income.
When we get there the economy collapses because there’s no money going into it.
The profits stop rolling in, unnecessary goods stop being produced, and the luxury goods producer’s shut down.
At this point the money they worked so hard to hoard becomes worthless because they can’t buy anything with it.
What’s the endgame for them if their current path takes them to a point where their assets are more or less worthless?
I read a short story years ago about just this. Quite an interesting read if anyone is interested.
I started reading before I went to bed, mistake.
I remember despite being receptive to the goal, finding that story a bit maddening.
spoiler
So the dystopian half was sadly credible enough, so not much to say there.
I didn’t like the way he tried to pave the way to the “better” approach as a contrast to the dystopia, while somehow being set in the same world.
So how does the socialist utopia come into being? By a nation of people transforming themselves into a better society? No, because of some benevolent rich dude. Well at least he spent his money to make it happen, but wait, first he had to get money from millions of people for no guaranteed results. So shockingly a rich dude with a very scammy seeming premise happens to be truthful, but realistically if other rich dudes saw the gullible people buying tickets to “maybe utopia one day” then there’d be competition and I can’t imagine the sincere rich dude prevaling against the con-men. So the story is firmly rooted in worshipping some abstract concept of a rich guy, strangely Randian in a way… But fine, it happens, not great, but let’s put that aside for now.
Ultimately, the difference between his dystopia and utopia is that “poor people” in the dystopia are confined to soul crushingly terrible dormitories, and in the utopia, they aren’t even allowed into the country at all. Sure no one will become poor in the utopia, but it’s likely that any person on the ‘right’ side in the dystopia also will never become poor. The mechanism to make it seem “better” is a lottery ticket, further waved away by having someone “off screen” buy it on his behalf, to let the protagonist benefit without actually spending money. Ultimately though the mechanism to get into the utopia was effectively buying a lottery ticket from an already rich dude to make him richer, a pretty capitalist mechanism.
There’s this part in the dystopian side where they reflected upon how when the plight of people in foreign lands were bad, they ignored it because it wasn’t their problem. Now they feel all too keenly being on the ‘outside’ while the rich enjoy their presumed paradise while the poor are trapped in their dorms. That now that they are afflicted, only now do they care. Ok, fine point. So the nature of the “socialist” paradise in this work is that you or someone you know paid for admittance, and so the protagonist leaves behind just a ton of anonymous folks to once again be part of the ‘in’ crowd. I made the connection that the guy basically had a lottery ticket purchased on his behalf that let him participate in what was likely just like the “rich” crowd. So I thought that the author would circle back to how quickly the protagonist got comfortable with ignoring those on the ‘outside’ again. Nope, now it was just just cool to live it up while the poor saps who did not buy the scam-like tickets are stuck on the outside still forgotten by the protagonist and the narrative, as their existence is now inconvenient to the message.
Then there was the solution to crime, which I thought would touch on a dystopian facet. That there’s a mandatory centrally controlled brain implant that, when “bad” behavior was detected, it would disconnect the brain from the body to prevent incorrect behavior. A world with constant thought monitoring and removal of bodily autonomy at the discretion of a central authority? That sounds like something that will be highlighted as some nightmarish bullshit… Nope, the author seemed to sincerely love the concept as a perfectly valid way of controlling the population, and all the characters loved it to.
What is cancer’s endgame when it spreads to the rest to the rest of the body?
They aren’t planning for the future of humanity, they just want their numbers to go up.
Money isn’t finite, that’s why billionaires and soon trillionaires exist. They couldn’t ( or literally had to be an emperor) when money had a closer relationship to reality or was gold. Anyways, because of the nature of our currency now, the size of their pile has zero effect on the size of your pile. “No new cars, no tech gadgets, no fancy dinners, no vacations, no disposable income.” not how it works. If you add up the 20 richest Americans, you get close to 2.7 trillion, which is the estimated amount of physical cash in circulation. None this shit is real. American national debut is 36 trillion. Ever saw an actual cash shortage? Like not a personal one, the money not existing to complete a transaction, like not being able to move cash you hold to another person because of lack of availability of signifiers? Not a thing anymore.
There is no end game. They’re hungry ghosts.
They just want an ever increasing “more”
This isn’t unique to the “hungry ghosts”.
Our behaviors are really quite simple. It has been shown a few times that our logical explanations for how we decide on our behavior are mostly rationalizations after the decision has been made, not actual reasons. I.e. like you say, we want more, then we find an explanation why we would want more.
For example, someone likes a new phone because it’s shiny and new, and says “why wouldn’t I treat myself once in a while”, “it’s faster which makes me more productive”, “it has X and Y new features which are useful in A and B situations”(which they’ll never encounter), and so on
No, actually, normal people can settle. That doesn’t mean they don’t treat themselves “once in a while” or sometimes crave something special or set new goals when they complete one, but they don’t need more more more all the time. They can have periods of contentment. I know I do.
But there are some people who always want more. They never are satisfied, not even for a second. As soon as they get something they want they’re already bored with it and want the next best thing. It’s a hedonic treadmill that gets faster and faster, they’re never happy.
Yeah of course we can override our desires, I never said anything to the contrary. The difference though is not the existence of the desire, but the lack of overriding it.
Normal people don’t desire more at all times. They’ll be happy for a while before setting their eyes on the next goal.
These hungry ghosts, though, never experience that period of contentment. That moment of happiness where they achieve what they want and can rest never comes, not even for a second. As soon as they get what they want they already want more. In fact, it’s probably more accurate to say they don’t even have goals. They only want more.
We would disagree there then. In my opinion the only difference is the situation people are in not allowing them to get more. If you need to work 2 months to get a new phone, gotta be “happy” with it for at least 2 months, and also can’t buy something else new.
If you look at lottery winners, most of them manage to lose all the money relatively quickly.
Most “non-rich” people spend their money they get from working quickly/instantly.
Oh I’m not saying they’re like, a different species of human or anything. This is just what being rich does to people.
They never experience that period where they have to settle for less. They always get more, and so they always want more. It’s the way their brains have been trained to expect rewards. Someone like me, who is happy using older stuff and waiting for the prices to come down, has been trained to live this way. Someone like them, who always wants the best and most expensive, was also trained to live that way. They become hungry ghosts because of their lifestyles.
Then we agree. It just sounded like you somehow attributed more inherent evilness to them than everyone else. I of course agree that the resulting behavior is worse, but mostly by accident through the situations they’ve been in.
What’s the end game for cancer?
There isn’t one, it doesn’t matter that the host dies eventually as long as they get to keep growing for now.
This is the answer. These people have no plan other than “make more money today”.
In mobile gaming we have an issue with whaling. A game will come out monetized beyond reason, and it doesn’t matter if 99% of players quit in the first hour, 1% of players have more money than brains and what they pay will make the game profitable. This is so effective that the play store now has no games worth playing because this is a far more lucrative business.
I see a lot of people taking about capitalism inevitably collapsing, but if all the money is collected in the hands of the 1%, products for the unreasonably wealthy will be the lucrative market. It doesn’t matter if only two people buy cars a year if the cars are sold at such a markup that it covers the annual expenses. Some my think that’s unrealistic, but we already have people who will spend a hundreds on a brick with a brand name on it. The ultra rich pay hundreds for a beige shirt that’s slightly higher quality than Walmart.
We’d be better off going back to barter than trying to peacefully pry the system from their clutches.
I dunno playstore has Balatro, Slay the Spire and many more indie games that don’t have microtransactions and are great.
There are some good indie games, and many more can be ported to phones, but the list is still small.
The end game is 1 person with all of it.
There are 3 key necessities for UBI/freedom dividends:
-
It redistributes power not wealth. Bad greed is oligarchy capturing your rulers. UBI weakens politicians discretion, because just paying everyone more cash instead of their corrupt ideas is “idiocracy proof”. Power redistributed to workers where everyone who wants a job gets 5 recruiter calls per day offering a better job. We all get greater power to say no to anything. Quality of life becomes exceptional without crimes of desperation, and the divisive hate that is easily manufactured from crime.
-
Redistribution means massive economic growth and overall prosperity even as it all trickles up to make the rich richer. “Velocity of money” is the key economic concept, but as income trickles back up to workers and owners, it means that the rich have to invest more to take all of our money.
-
The alternative is genocide. Oligarchy having all of the money and power, and AI/robotics to do work, means robocop detroit for Americans, and war on rest of the world to take their land. It doesn’t matter that far more wealth can be generated with more people to sell stuff to. The logic of pillaging America/world for oligarchs with ever decreasing tax rates on corporations and the rich means more relative wealth and power for the oligarchy and its political minions.
This 3rd point is similar to yours. Except its not just “This is America, if you don’t make money you’re a douchebag”, and the rich just give up on life, it’s “you need to be exterminated because you are useless to the rulership.”
-
It’s even better than that, because the massive inequality created by Capitalism has already got us to a state where the human population is going to collapse within the next few decades, even if climate change doesn’t do it first. Simply, most people never feel like they can afford to start a family during the years when they would have started one before. The oligarchs know this and are freaking out about birth rates now, but it’s already too late - can’t be King of the mountain if the mountain is only a hill.
