5 ms·

My takeaway- the VC's have leveraged the money from their successes to create a vortex that sucks in money from consumers, into privately owned companies, back

My takeaway- the VC's have leveraged the money from their successes to create a vortex that sucks in money from consumers, into privately owned companies, back into VC pockets, and back into more companies that get more people to spend more money. The tech vortex that is sucking away quality of life from the middle class and padding the billionaires (and large company) bank accounts. Throwing out a few bones on occasion (fewer and fewer) to entrepreneurs to keep the vortex going. Vortex is the opposite of bubble, but it does the same thing to the life of the average person.

nathantotten 11y ago
When you read "public returns" that doesn't mean the middle class. The "public market" the deck is referring just means that the trading happens on the open market (NASDAQ, S&P, etc.) rather than in private deals. Regardless, it is always the big players who make the big returns. The average investor wasn't the one making all the returns on Microsoft either. So you are right that the rich use these tools to get richer, but it is hardly a new thing.
- Spooky23 11y ago
  So, those 30% annual returns my dad made in the 90s were some sort of dream? The early players made more, but plenty of people rode Microsoft and Intel up through the 80s and 90s. We all missed the first decade of Dropbox. Billionaires make wacky amounts of money in stock because we stopped taxing them.
nostrademons 11y ago
That's the way capitalism has always worked - it is up to you to make deals that increase your overall level of happiness, and it's up to your counterparties to ensure that those deals also increase their happiness. In past years, instead of "VCs" the villains have been hedge funds, private equity, corporate raiders, giant conglerates, corporations in general, investment trusts, robber barons, and colonial empires. In return, the average person has gotten information at their fingertips, sheep-throwing, Farmville, Candy Crush, easy travel bookings, a place to stay in every city, a computer on every desk, the ability to fly through the air, a car of their own and a house in the suburbs, and many other things. The reason money gets drawn away from "the average person" and collects in "billionaires and large companies" is because the average person values money for what it can do for them, while billionaires and large companies value money as a scorecard. Naturally, it makes sense that money will flow away from people who want it so they can spend it, and toward people who want it so they can hoard it. If you're unhappy with this arrangement, decide which side you would rather be on and then act accordingly.
- jsprogrammer 11y ago
  >In return In return for what? I've read your post several times now and it's unclear what you are referring to.
  - nostrademons 11y ago
    In return for forking over the vast majority of their income. It doesn't just vanish (well, except for credit card interest...that does just vanish). The "vortex" that the grandparent's referring to is the money that customers are shelling out for services, which then becomes a tech company's revenue. But in return for shelling out that money, they get mobile phones, cloud storage, a place to stay in every city, on-demand transportation, access to service professionals, a second income stream, exposure for their business, and many other things of value.
  - Spooky23 11y ago
    The Romans called it bread & circus. You get candy crush and an iPhone to let you work harder.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- lnanek2 11y ago
  This is basically what Capital in the 21st Century said too. People who reinvest money they make into making more money are getting richer. Those who spend it are not. Pretty straight forward.
  - anigbrowl 11y ago
    Except that unless you are lucky, you're unlikely to become wealthy from just saving/investing ordinary income. You're both presenting it as if it were a simple choice between being frugal and engaging in consumption, but it's not.
    - nostrademons 11y ago
tomasien 11y ago
You're just describing capitalism.

nathantotten 11y ago

When you read "public returns" that doesn't mean the middle class. The "public market" the deck is referring just means that the trading happens on the open market (NASDAQ, S&P, etc.) rather than in private deals. Regardless, it is always the big players who make the big returns. The average investor wasn't the one making all the returns on Microsoft either. So you are right that the rich use these tools to get richer, but it is hardly a new thing.

Spooky23 11y ago
So, those 30% annual returns my dad made in the 90s were some sort of dream? The early players made more, but plenty of people rode Microsoft and Intel up through the 80s and 90s. We all missed the first decade of Dropbox. Billionaires make wacky amounts of money in stock because we stopped taxing them.

nostrademons 11y ago

That's the way capitalism has always worked - it is up to you to make deals that increase your overall level of happiness, and it's up to your counterparties to ensure that those deals also increase their happiness. In past years, instead of "VCs" the villains have been hedge funds, private equity, corporate raiders, giant conglerates, corporations in general, investment trusts, robber barons, and colonial empires. In return, the average person has gotten information at their fingertips, sheep-throwing, Farmville, Candy Crush, easy travel bookings, a place to stay in every city, a computer on every desk, the ability to fly through the air, a car of their own and a house in the suburbs, and many other things. The reason money gets drawn away from "the average person" and collects in "billionaires and large companies" is because the average person values money for what it can do for them, while billionaires and large companies value money as a scorecard. Naturally, it makes sense that money will flow away from people who want it so they can spend it, and toward people who want it so they can hoard it. If you're unhappy with this arrangement, decide which side you would rather be on and then act accordingly.

jsprogrammer 11y ago
>In return In return for what? I've read your post several times now and it's unclear what you are referring to.
- nostrademons 11y ago
  In return for forking over the vast majority of their income. It doesn't just vanish (well, except for credit card interest...that does just vanish). The "vortex" that the grandparent's referring to is the money that customers are shelling out for services, which then becomes a tech company's revenue. But in return for shelling out that money, they get mobile phones, cloud storage, a place to stay in every city, on-demand transportation, access to service professionals, a second income stream, exposure for their business, and many other things of value.
- Spooky23 11y ago
  The Romans called it bread & circus. You get candy crush and an iPhone to let you work harder.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
lnanek2 11y ago
This is basically what Capital in the 21st Century said too. People who reinvest money they make into making more money are getting richer. Those who spend it are not. Pretty straight forward.
- anigbrowl 11y ago
  Except that unless you are lucky, you're unlikely to become wealthy from just saving/investing ordinary income. You're both presenting it as if it were a simple choice between being frugal and engaging in consumption, but it's not.
  - nostrademons 11y ago

tomasien 11y ago

You're just describing capitalism.