• Vespair@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    1 year ago

    I agree fully, but I do want to know what the original image said before “birth lottery” was edited in

      • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Luck is the most generically accurate, but ultimately it does come down to birth lottery, as someone can just be born poor and disabled and no amount of post-birth luck is going to fix that.

        • wischi@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Post birth luck can fix it. Wouldn’t call Eminem a winner of the birth lottery but he was definitely pretty lucky with dr dre

    • Troy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not rich. But I was born poor and am no longer poor. The Birth Lottery blessed me with a brain, and with that as my only asset, I learned esoteric skills which I can parley into a niche career.

      But more importantly, the social safety net in my country allowed me to get an education without becoming a wage slave for the rest of my life. Without that, I couldn’t have pulled this escape from poverty off.

      I now run my own business. We have no employees – only owners who have self-invested. Our business is growing and I anticipate a comfortable retirement. Haven’t got rich off the working class either.

      So, thank you Canada for the opportunities. I’ve tried to make the most of them.

  • Zozano@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    You can literally just make the entire second pie chart “exploiting the working class”, because “birth lottery” is dependant on that.

  • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Own something valuable and then borrow against that thing. Easiest example would be to own stock worth say a thousand dollars and borrow a hundred dollars from that stock value you get to keep the stock worth nine hundred dollars growing in value while you pay the one hundred dollar “debt” off. If you ever get to where you could not pay it for some reason, you could always take $100 and pay it off immediately. I’ve heard this referred to as the buy borrow strategy and some people to avoid taxes will use this perpetually and they call it the buy borrow die strategy. Selling an asset often involves extremely heavy extortion from gangs that we call governments, where borrowing from the value of that asset does not incur such an extortion penalty.

    Edit: The most important part though is just to make more than you spend from whatever you do.

  • realbadat@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Slightly more accurate may be combining both birth lottery and merciless exploitation.

    Since winning that lottery let’s them be the people who can mercilessly exploit people, who then have children who won that lottery, etc.

      • realbadat@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh, I read it as half the people won the birth lottery, the other half exploited people.

        As a 50/50 split for the person yeah that’s what it would be

        Just how I read the images sorry :)

  • shiveyarbles@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I agree for the most part. I do know people who got rich by working hard, treating employees fairly and with empathy, and providing a useful service.

  • blazera@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Capitalism just has a feedback loop bug. In capitalism, resources are distributed based on capital. But capital is a resource. So you get more capital for having more capital. In any business, who gets the most money that business generates? Whoever had the most money to buy into it. No work, no expertise is involved in the equation.

    • huginn@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah it’s a bit derivative. Everyone already knows this and agrees with it. It’s self evidently true. Nobody ever needs this explained to them, everyone already knows and agrees!