Quote from: justusranvier on July 14, 2015, 09:57:01 PM

Quote from: Zarathustra on July 14, 2015, 08:17:50 PM

It is about a majority of brain cells and intellectual authority.

The value of money comes from future economic output.

The majority of entities that will produce the most economic value in the future is the majority that matters.

In many cases, people who have accumulated a large amount of money in the present have done so because they have a high capacity to produce economic value and so in their case they contribute significantly to the economic majority.

This is not true in all cases, however. Someone who obtained large amounts of money through luck or via processes which are not repeatable in the future don't contribute as much to the economic majority as their current holdings would suggest.

This is the primary flaw behind who try to frame debates in terms of "rich" vs "poor". They aren't being sufficiently precise.

Yes, but additional production is always produced via credit. A system without credit/debt does not need to grow and therefore it doesn't grow. Rain forest people are not forced to increase their 'output'. Their output does not grow in thousand years. Only nationalized people are forced to produce surplus, because they are forced to pay tribute. That's the root of credit/debt: organized violence (collectivism/society).