How Capitalism Hurts Rich People

Capitalism hurts the poor. This is commonly understood and expressed, mainly by communists, socialists, and other anti-capitalists. Now I would agree with this. But I would also go further. Capitalism is toxic and it destroys everything that it touches. The poor of-course, but also the rich, the capitalists the entrepreneurs and the proprietors. To me communism is not anti-rich it is anti-capitalism. The economic philosophy centered around individual accumulation and distribution of wealth (capitalism), is countered by the economic philosophy centered around the collective accumulation and distribution of wealth (communism). And it should be obvious that an economy for a society (which is a collective) based on individual accumulation and distribution of wealth is deeply flawed, unstable, and a very bad idea.

But for who? The working class? The proletariat? The laborers? The proprietors? The entrepreneurs? Well yes, to all. Now maybe your a capitalist or neoliberal, and you don’t think capitalism hurts anybody, and, well I'll come for you another day. This is mainly for my fellow comrades, who I believe have failed greatly when it comes to “how capitalism hurts rich people”. And that is what I intend to focus on in this article.

First I would like to talk about expectation. What is expected of people varies on what they do, and how much money they have. Society puts rich people on a pedestal. Love them or hate them you know you expect a lot from them. You expect them to make sure that pedestal doesn't break, you expect them to fix the ones that have, and you expect them to be happy. Despite knowing that old cliché “money doesn’t buy happiness” and that's true, but we, as a society kind of still expect it to. This is a lot of pressure, and pressure can be good, but not when it is unreasonable. It is reasonable to expect some one to be good at what they do, it is not reasonable to expect someone to be great simply because they got lucky. Imagine you’re playing the slots at a casino, and you lose continuously, because of course you do, those things are rigged (seriously they payout like ten percent of the time) and everybody knows it. This is why when you see someone win, someone get lucky, you don’t blame them, hate them, expect them to fix you, or even expect them to keep the winning going. You know they just got lucky, you know it’s all the system and it wouldn't make sense to blame them or pressure them. Now I am not saying that you should never criticize the rich. When a rich man bribes congress to make sure poor people don’t get healthcare, that is a very fucked up thing to do. Just as if that winner at the slots let it go to his head and he started insulting you or something, it would absolutely be reasonable to call him a dick. But because he’s being a dick, not because he got lucky and/or rich.

Now pressure, this particular pressure put on the rich, it is unreasonable, yes, but also harmful to them and their loved ones. For instance, who do you think would be more likely to take their son fishing? The rich father? Or, the poor father? Now the rich father would almost certainly be more likely to have the time, but I think the poor father would be far more likely to take advantage of it. The reason is that a poor man is not under any pressure to succeed. The poor man has other pressures no doubt, but a pressure to succeed is not one of them. That is until, they do succeed, they get lucky, they win once and are expected to keep that going forever. So with that said when the poor father has the time to go fishing with his kid, he is more likely to take advantage of it, simply because there is no pressure to do anything else. But the rich father who has the time, is also under continuous pressure, to keep that success, to maximize the monetary value of their time. Time is money, after all.

Now you might think these are all social issues, the way society sees things, not capitalism. And that is true, but it is also inherent in capitalism. Remember capitalism is all about individualism. Working in you’re own best interest, to hell with everybody else. And this will result in idolization. Some idol to see our selves in, and aspire to be, not bad in and of it self, but it is certainly a lot of pressure on said idol, pressure that I would (and have) argued is unreasonable. And that really is the crux of the issue. Capitalism promotes an environment of greed and apathy, of never-ending pressure to make more and more, and then still more, all for you, yourself, to hell with everybody else. That’s what it means to succeed in our world. And I find that sad and don’t really know what else to blame for the bulk of that bull shit than the prevailing economic philosophy centered around individual accumulation and distribution of wealth.

Now in closing I would like to make two other arguments. The first, related to my former, paraphrased from Adam Smith about wealth inequality. And that is; as the rich get richer and live more luxuriously, they are seen as better, not just more successful, but morally better which results in horrendous action done by the rich to be seen as morally good. It’s not that rich people are evil or something, it’s that environment that reinforces the good out of the bad from the rich. This makes me think of my earlier example of the rich and poor fathers. The poor father may be more likely to take his kid fishing than the rich father, but neither are bad as people, they are both telling themselves the same thing, regardless of what they do, they both tell them selves they’re doing it for their kid, for their family. The next argument is unique and not related to my former arguments. It is paraphrased from Pierre Joseph Proudhon on property. It is; When the proprietor ceases to be a laborer production goes down, and as the proprietor consumes his property, he must therefore produce more, or consume less, or else continually risk bankruptcy, and those are all kinda shit options. Last thing I'll say is as one succeeds more that pedestal gets bigger, on the already unstable ground that is capitalism. And to a point that bankruptcy risk is not individual any more. That is when a company gets to big to fail, when the failing would be devastating to all, the bigger that pedestal gets, the greater risk of devastation to all around. But that's going into other problems, and if you’re curious about those, well then, stay tuned.