Wealth Creation Bad — Class Warfare Good

The myth unions tell employees until the employers close shop and leave

One of the common arguments that union leaders use to criticize successful founders who become millionaires or billionaires is that they get their wealth on the back of the working class.

They claim that these founders exploit their workers, pay them low wages, and avoid taxes, while they enjoy the fruits of their innovation and hard work.

This gives the impression that there is a finite amount of money and wealth to go around and that those successful founders found ways to take more than their fair share of that total amount.

Is this true or are there other ways and reasons successful founders become financially independent and rich? If so, what are they and how does it work?

In this article, I will try to answer these questions by looking at some of the economic concepts and facts that explain how wealth is created and distributed in a market economy.

I will also address some of the common myths and misconceptions that surround the topic of entrepreneurship and wealth creation.

My trigger was a recent interview with the UAW leader Sean Fain on MSNBC, where he claimed that auto workers are part of the suppressed class, and the shareholders and company owners are part of the millionaire and billionaire class.

I recall from my school years that class warfare was always the underlying approach of unions. In this scenario and world, similar to the current political climate, we are forced to choose sides and accept that the other side is our enemy and that we need to fight to the death.

First, let’s define what we mean by a successful founder.

A successful founder is someone who creates a new product or service that solves a problem or satisfies a need for a large number of customers.

A successful founder is also someone who can scale their business, hire more employees, attract more investors, and generate more revenue and profit.

Successful founders create more than one company in their lifetime. Currently, Elon Musk is often seen in the media as an example, but others like Peter Thiel have done so as well.

A successful founder is not someone who simply inherits or steals their wealth, or who engages in illegal or unethical practices.

Anybody who is part of the Ideal Wealth Grower community knows that I am strongly encouraging every new member to soon after joining create a company, an LLC, become a business owner and develop the asset portfolio within that company.

As the portfolio grows and interests expand, the company can grow and start employing workers.

In my own case across my two companies, we have more than 10 people working to keep operations going and provide services to our customers. Does that mean I, as the founder, are the enemy of these 10 people and they have to start organizing and fighting me?

Secondly, let’s clarify what we mean by wealth.

Wealth is not the same as money. Money is just a medium of exchange that facilitates transactions and trade. Wealth is the value of the goods and services that money can buy.

Wealth is created when people produce more goods and services than they consume, or when they improve the quality or efficiency of existing goods and services.

Wealth is not a zero-sum game, meaning that one person’s gain does not necessarily imply another person’s loss. Wealth can grow or shrink depending on how productive and innovative people are.

Thirdly, let’s examine how successful founders create wealth.

Successful founders create wealth by creating value for their customers, employees, investors, and society at large.

They do this by solving problems, satisfying needs, improving lives, and generating positive externalities. For example, a successful founder who creates a new app that helps people communicate better, save time, or have fun, is creating value for their users.

A successful founder who hires more workers, pays them competitive wages, and provides them with training and benefits, is creating value for their employees.

A successful founder who attracts more investors, offers them a return on their investment, and shares their vision and mission, is creating value for their investors.

A successful founder who pays taxes, follows regulations, supports charities, and contributes to social causes, is creating value for society.

Some of the common myths about entrepreneurship and the founders who create new companies are:

• Entrepreneurs are born, not made.

This myth implies that entrepreneurship is a trait that some people have and others don’t and that it cannot be learned or developed. However, research shows that entrepreneurship can be influenced by education, training, experience, and environment. Anyone can become an entrepreneur if they have the right mindset, skills, and opportunities.

• Entrepreneurs are risk-takers.

This myth suggests that entrepreneurs are reckless and gamble with their money and resources. However, studies show that entrepreneurs are not more risk-seeking than the general population. They are actually more risk-aware and risk-managing. They assess the potential risks and rewards of their ventures and take calculated risks that they can afford and control.

• Entrepreneurs are motivated by money.

This myth assumes that entrepreneurs are driven by greed and materialism. However, surveys show that entrepreneurs are motivated by various factors, such as autonomy, challenge, passion, purpose, and impact. Money is not the primary goal, but rather a means to an end.

• Entrepreneurs are lone wolves.

This myth portrays entrepreneurs as isolated and independent individuals who do everything by themselves. However, evidence shows that entrepreneurs are collaborative and interdependent actors who rely on networks of support and resources. They build teams, partnerships, alliances, and communities to achieve their goals.

These myths are not only inaccurate but also harmful.

They create unrealistic expectations and stereotypes about entrepreneurs that can discourage or mislead potential or aspiring entrepreneurs.

They also create a negative image of entrepreneurs that can generate distrust or hostility from others.

The truth is that entrepreneurs are diverse and dynamic people who create value for themselves and others. They are wealth creators who deserve recognition and respect for their achievements and contributions.

They are not wealth-takers who deserve condemnation and resentment for their success and fortune.

Successful founders do not create wealth by taking it from others. They create wealth by adding to the total amount of wealth that exists in the economy.

They do this by increasing the supply and demand of goods and services, by creating new markets and opportunities, by stimulating innovation and competition, by enhancing productivity and efficiency, and by generating positive spillover effects for other sectors and industries.

Of course, this does not mean that successful founders are perfect or flawless. They may make mistakes, face challenges, encounter failures, or face criticism.

They may also face ethical dilemmas, moral trade-offs, or social responsibilities. They may have to balance their personal interests with the interests of others. They may have to deal with conflicts, disputes, or lawsuits. They may have to cope with stress, pressure, or burnout.

However, these challenges do not negate the fact that successful founders are wealth creators who deserve recognition and respect for their achievements and contributions.

They are not wealth-takers who deserve condemnation and resentment for their success and fortune.

That is one more reason for me to call our community the Ideal Wealth Growers when I founded it.

Taking into consideration how unions are suggesting that all of us have to choose sides, identify our enemies, and begin fighting for our share of the limited pie, what possible reactions are available to founders?

I catch myself more and more often using tools that are supported by artificial intelligence. The advances in this field are rapid and the applicability of the tools appears endless. Every day new ideas and inventions are announced.

So, if we as founders and wealth growers are so evil and selfish, how will those founders at the top of that pyramid react to the vilification and accusations by the unions?

That debate has been reignited by the recent strikes and protests of workers in various sectors, such as health care, education, and entertainment.

Union leaders claim that successful founders who become millionaires or billionaires get their wealth on the back of the working class, who deserve fair wages, benefits, and working conditions.

They argue that unions are essential for protecting the rights and interests of workers, especially in the face of increasing automation, outsourcing, and globalization.

However, some entrepreneurs and innovators have a different vision for the future of work.

Multi-company founders like Elon Musk have suggested that one solution is to create humanoid robots like Optimus to replace the traditional workforce and increase productivity without threats of unionization, 32-hour work weeks, vacation and sick time, etc.

How soon can this happen, how will it change the landscape for the economy, unions and the work force and how will recent union labor contract successes accelerate this development?

According to Musk, his company Tesla is working on developing a humanoid robot that can perform tasks that are “unsafe, repetitive or boring” for humans.

He claims that the robot will be able to do everything from picking up groceries to building cars and that it will be “friendly” and “eliminate dangerous, repetitive, and boring tasks”. He also says that the robot will be designed to be “at a mechanical level, at a physical level, you can run away from it and most likely overpower it”. He expects to have a prototype ready by next year (2024).

Musk is not the only one who is betting on the potential of humanoid robots. Other companies, such as Boston Dynamics, Hanson Robotics, and SoftBank Robotics, have also been developing robots that can mimic human movements, expressions, and interactions.

Some of these robots have been deployed in various settings, such as hotels, restaurants, hospitals, and schools. The market for humanoid robots is expected to grow rapidly in the coming years, reaching $9.6 billion by 2023.

The proponents of humanoid robots claim that they will bring many benefits to society, such as enhancing efficiency, reducing costs, improving quality, and creating new opportunities. They also argue that robots will not replace humans entirely, but rather complement them and free them from mundane and tedious tasks. They believe that humans will still have a competitive edge over robots in terms of creativity, empathy, and social skills.

I, myself totally look forward to the day when we can purchase an Optimus for our household. I am actually wondering if it will be able to handle everything I can imagine wanting it to do. In addition, I know my wife said she would want it to do a ton of stuff. We might need two ??.

However, not everyone is convinced by these optimistic scenarios. Critics of humanoid robots warn that they will pose many challenges and risks to society, such as displacing workers, increasing inequality, eroding human dignity, and threatening security.

They contend that robots will not only take over low-skill jobs but also high-skill ones that require complex problem-solving and decision-making. They fear that humans will become obsolete and dependent on machines in the future.

Moreover, critics question the ethical and moral implications of creating humanoid robots that resemble humans in appearance and behavior. I don’t believe putting a face on a robot or allowing it to have some human-like facial reactions to assignments and tasks is a bad thing per se.

They ask whether robots have rights and responsibilities, whether they can feel emotions and pain, whether they can develop consciousness and self-awareness, and whether they can harm or deceive humans.

They also wonder how humans will relate to robots that look and act like them, whether they will form bonds or conflicts with them.

To me, a lot of that discussion appears like pretending to be able to predict what is possible and then only picking everything that could be negative.

Thinking back to the emergence of smartphones, if we had only looked at the negative impact of screen time, annoying the public by constantly having to listen to people having conversations on speakers, people getting insured because they are distracted by the device, crossing streets on red, running into each other during rush hour, causing accidents due to texting while driving, and on and on, we would have probably banned any development of smartphones.

The debate over humanoid robots is likely to intensify as technology advances and more robots enter the market.

The impact of robots on the economy, unions, and the workforce will depend on various factors, such as the pace of innovation, the level of regulation, the degree of adoption, the nature of collaboration, and the type of response.

Some experts predict that robots will create more jobs than they destroy, while others foresee a massive loss of jobs and income for workers. Some suggest that unions will adapt and evolve to represent both human and robot workers, while others anticipate a decline or demise of unions in the face of robotization.

The future of work is uncertain and unpredictable. However, one thing is clear: humanoid robots will play a significant role in shaping it.

I believe that class warfare and this ever-increasing push by the media, the unions, and politicians to choose sides will ultimately be the main reason for failure.

I am convinced that we are currently living through a time of historic transition for the first time in a century.

We are moving away from a bipolar world towards a multi-polar world. I hope it is also a movement away from solving most problems through war and towards a world where the better idea, the better approach, the more affordable solution, and the more collaborative approach wins.

Will we be part of the side that is aiming towards collaboration, growth, and exploration of what’s possible, or will we be on the side that is stuck in warfare, the right of the strongest over the weaker, and the extension of political power through warfare if perceived as needed.

I am working every day on creating the freedom for my family and myself to independently select those who are on the side of expansion and collaboration.

Anybody who likes to join that approach is welcome with open arms and those who are already members of our community hopefully help me and each other to succeed.

Ask yourself where you see yourself right now and consciously select where you want to be. If you like where we are and what we aim to accomplish, feel free to join us.