• Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    So it doesn’t change anything. You get $30k and yes that $30k is worth more because it can generate maybe $3k in investment income for you a year. It’s still only $30k.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I honestly don’t know what you are arguing about. If someone has $100 it is technically worth more than $100. If they give you that $100 you now have that $100 which is also technically worth more than $100. It’s the same $100 + unspecified future value either way.

        If you argue the $8.4 trillion in net worth of Billionaires is worth more than the $8.4 T, then if that $8.4 was taken from them it is also worth more.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          If someone has $100 it is technically worth more than $100.

          If someone buys a house for $500k it’s worth $500k. But it’s also a place to live, which makes it invaluable to a person without a home.

          If the value declines to $400k then the net value is -$100k. But, again, the house has value as a place to live that humans need. Being underwater on your home isn’t the same as being homeless. And owning a million homes that lose value is very different than being broke.

          Use value and exchange value are different things. And saying you have $8.4T on paper means something very different than saying you control properties, equities, and IP that other people need, but can’t have, because you’re hoping to flip it for a profit.