/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.16624600]

Can someone tell me why we glamorize capitalists? There's literally nothing easier than making money from already having money. You can either employ people to make more money for you or put it into a bank or fund or stocks or property. That makes you more money which in turn gives you even more money to invest which in turn gives you even more money. You now have so much money you can afford to invest in riskier technological breakthroughs or engage in some riskier trading, whatever loses you incur are going to easily be paid for by your stream of revenue from other investments and when you inveitably hit on one of those highly risky bets your millions turn into billions. Now you have so much money you can afford to lobby politicians and bypass or change laws in order to make even more money, you have so much money now that even theoretical risk doesn't exist anymore as you can impact legislation and political power.

Why is it hard being a capitalist again?

[Anonymous No.16624609]

>>16624600
I can tell you arw not around other people much. Or made money for yourself in anyway or form.

[Anonymous No.16624624]

>>16624609
Au contraire. I have always made money for myself and never held a regular job. I communicate with extremely wealthy people, lawyers and politicians on a daily basis.

[Anonymous No.16624625]

>>16624600
if its easy to make money why arent you rich

[Anonymous No.16624637]

>>16624625
i can tell your reading comprehension is definitely part of the reason why you aren't rich.

[Anonymous No.16624640]

>>16624600
>There's literally nothing easier than making money from already having money.

retard alert

[Anonymous No.16624643]

>>16624600
"hurr durr it's so easy to be a billionaire, you just invest in things and then get a return on your capital"

really groundbreaking analysis, thanks for sharing

[Anonymous No.16624728]

>>16624643
you're welcome. of course you need a critical starting point of capital. most people dont have it so people think becoming rich is hard. the hard part is getting the first million, after that its fairly easy to multiply it. which we should really rephrase as its hard becoming not poor or middle class. if you manage to do that you can reap the rewards by basically doing nothing for the rest of your life. so it is absolutely retarded that any sense of importance is given to the facts like someone owning 3 factories or making 100 million of stocks. assuming you started or have made your way to a few million, you'd have to be an absolute brainlet not to make 100 million in a few years. the part that is worth congratulating people on is making the first or the second million.

[Anonymous No.16624805]

>>16624728
I think you're being unrealistic.

having $1,000,000 doesn't open up meaningful investment opportunities that aren't already available to you with $1,000.

with $1,000 you can:
>buy stocks
>buy bonds
>park it in a savings account or a CD
>invest in start-ups via Reg A

with $1,000,000 you can:
>invest in all of the same things as above
>invest in real estate
>invest in start-ups via Reg D

the returns on real estate or Reg D start-ups really isn't that much better than the returns on stuff in the first section. You seem to have this idea in your head that when you have less than $1,000,000 then you get a 10% rate of return but somehow once you have $1,000,000 you can get a 50% rate of return or something. You're wrong.

[Anonymous No.16624822]

>>16624805
You can invest in Reg D offerings with $1000 too. There is a 35 non-accredited investor limit but it's possible.

[Anonymous No.16624841]

>>16624600
i'd rather know why we keep getting these shitty /pol/ threads in biz

[Anonymous No.16624858]

>>16624805
Calculate what is 10% of 1000 and 10% of one million. Then calculate what is 10% of the return you got on the first and the second. Hint: its 10 and 10000. Now tell me what revenue-earning investment can you make with each of these.

[Anonymous No.16624878]

>>16624841
Redditors crossing the fence.

[Anonymous No.16624898]

>>16624858
to put it into simpler terms. if you're starting with zero disposable capital, in poverty or to a lesser extent middle class, you will need to be a genius to make the first million. you only need to be not a brainlet to make 10 million from 1 million, because even passive returns on 1 million will result in enough money to make more passive returns. While you can make infinite returns on 10$ and stay in poverty your entire life.

[Anonymous No.16624958]

>>16624898
Put even into simpler terms. a 10% return on 1 million will result in 100k, 100k is still a large enough number that several low-risk strategies will yield a 10% return that results in a notable number at 10k. All of those numbers are big enough to matter in terms of accumulation of capital and business opportunity, although 10k is really on the fence. Even if you choose not to utilize any of those in an active manner, just by having 1 million invested into a passive 10% return you will have large enough sums coming that the accumulation rate actually matters.

If you live in poverty and have saved 5k, you cannot do anything with that. It offers no real option to accumulate capital, a 10% passive return is a joke and its quite a low number to start a business. In order to get out of this predicament and make the kind of money you need before it starts working for you, you will be reliant strictly on your genius and luck.

Hence being a capitalist is extremely easy, it's completely equivalent towards playing the game not only with cheats that boost all your skills but having an infinite amount of revival options for when your attacks fail or something goes wrong. the only real danger is the operating system itself crashing the game.

[Anonymous No.16624983]

>>16624958
so again my argument is only that it is commendable to congratulate someone who worked his way out of poverty or middle class. but that someone rich became filthy rich? not so much. rich people falling into middle class or poverty should be considered as bigger brainlets than the homeless by far, unless they simply did not care about the money in the first place, that's excusable.