I think a counterpoint to this is to overlay the amount of money that is added to the country by each of these groups. What has been the economic prosperity to our GDP by the 1%, 20%, etc. Agreed, there is disparity in ownership of wealth, but there is also a disparity in the creation of innovation, business, and positive overall economic impact. It should be part of the story.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Good point. I hadn't thought of this.
Wanted to point out, though, that truly unique innovation is quite often quickly quashed as it is too disruptive to dominant power structures.
I am not sure that applies in the tech sector. Take a look at Microsoft, HP, Apple, Google, Facebook, etc. They all started very small (one or two people) and grew to become massive. The U.S. is a place where someone with a good idea can make an impact on the world. They are a part of that 1% now. How many jobs, how much economic prosperity have they contributed to the country? Quite a bit.
Okay. I should restate. "Truly unique innovation is either quashed or co-opted by plutocrats."
Also, much of the wealth of those firms comes from taking others' ideas. E.g., Apple & Xerox, Facebook & Livejournal, etc. Google initially became dominant because of their advanced search algorithm and Microsoft because of their innovative OS. But, since that point much of their work has been derivative. Of the above, I'd give Google/Alphabet the most credit for building creative solutions.