is anyone robbing anyone by paying for smarts?

Question

paying for smarts is paying for no work - payment is converted into goods = products of work

so paying for smarts [gifts of nature, not the person's work] is giving work for no work -permitting the person taking out more than the person puts in [theft, injustice, wealth, political power [to steal more bigger faster] ], forcing others to take out less than they put in [slavery, loss of political power, democracy, rights] - permittg legal theft - money for nothg [money for nothg of the person - money for something of mother nature's - paying the wrong persn - mother nature doesnt need to be pd - we couldnt afford to buy her gifts]

ppl think: bill gates: $500,000/hr [his lifetime avg], rich, lucky guy [& maybe: wow, that cd be me!] - they dont grasp: putting in one hr of himself, taking out 50,000 hrs of other ppl - ie, ppl putting in 50,000 hrs of themselves, taking out one hr for themselves

bg can work one hr, & buy a $500,000 smthg - but he cant make a $500,000 smthg in 1 hr

Answer 1

There are two ways to earn money. One is by physical activity and the other is by brains.

While I would definitely agree that many executives are overpaid for their brain power, I would still say that brain power is worth more than physical activity.

You can always find people who can do physical work, but they will generally not find a better way to complete their tasks and increase their efficiency. They also will not create nearly as many new concepts and things as the brains will.

Take care,
Troy

Answer 2

Would you prefer that a person like Bill Gates had not come along?You would not be posting here on Yahoo or elsewhere were it not for the WWW.Consider that most of the entrepreneurs of yesterday (Frick,Rockefeller,Carnegie) endowed many philanthropies just as Gates is doing now. You sound like you may have a serious case of class envy imho.

Answer 3

Assume you were stupid and I was smart. I knew how to grow wheat and you didn't know how to grow wheat. If I work by myself I can grow 10 bushels of wheat. If I hire you I can grow 30 bushels of wheat. All alone you can manage to get 5 bushels.

How much should I pay you if I hire you?
I could pay you 6 bushels and you should happily accept. You could demand 19 bushels and I should accept.
If bargaining power is even, I should get more because I have less to lose. Think Nash bargaining would split things 17.5 and 12.5. If you don't think that's fair, you can go ahead and eat your 5 bushels.

Answer 4

Your premise is flawed.

"Smarts" involves (A) the work of accumulating wisdom (done at some point in the individual's life), and (B) the mental work of recombining that information for applicable use.

Anyone who pays another person for their "smarts" (i.e. a product of their applied knowledge) has placed a value on not having to put in the work of acumulating that experience themselves or producing that intelligent output.

Economics is just the abstract application of the barter system and it works because all parties are making what they view to be equitable trades.