[esperent]

> one Einstein contributes more to the world (on average) than one garbage worker

And so does one Putin. Your point about scale is valid but the implied value judgement of choosing Einstein is not (whether you intended that or not, choosing Einstein ensures everyone will read it that way).

One software developer or engineer working for a big nasty corporation like Shell or Facebook does create more change in the world than one garbage collector, undoubtedly. But it's fully possible for the change they create to be entirely negative. An engineer who creates a faster rainforest cutting machine, for example, or a better method of catching fish that results in destruction of an ecosystem, or a developer who writes ever more sneaky ways to invade your privacy. More change does not equal more value.

[zimpenfish]

> But it's fully possible for the change they create to be entirely negative.

cf the ur-example of Thomas Midgely Jr[1] who developed leaded gasoline (bad) and then went onto CFCs (bad).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Midgley_Jr.

[lazyasciiart]

If money is a fair assessment of value, every single slave owner must have contributed more to the world than the entire population of slaves!!

[kenjackson]

Even the most cynical don’t consider non-capitalist systems like slavery something that models value.

[lazyasciiart]

Even the most naive don’t believe that a perfect capitalist market exists today, so that’s irrelevant. He isn’t arguing that “in a perfect system this would be true”, he is arguing that in this system, it is true.

[pbhjpbhj]

How is slavery non-Capitalist. I always thought it was the epitome of market capitalism as human life gets valued by the market?

[cloverich]

Because it requires the literal use of government force to suppress market forces, ie to prevent the slaves from refusing to work and running away to find better opportunities.

[lazyasciiart]

No, it doesn’t. It requires only private force and the absence of government force used to prevent the use of it.

[kenjackson]

That doesn't work. You're effectively saying that if I create an army and simply steal from you, that is capitalism because its my own private army. It violates many tenets of capitalism. Buyers and sellers must act voluntarily and enslavement against the will of the slaves, certainly seems to violate this.

That said, even if you simply view the slaves as property with no agency of their own, my original point was more that you can't compare the net worth of the slaves against the slave owners in terms of value created.

[cloverich]

Do you have examples of widespread slave economy that did not require a government framework to support it? All examples from modern civilization i can think of involved laws specifically blocking slaves from participating as equals in the market economy, ie anti capitalist?

[pbhjpbhj]

People sell themselves into slavery too.

But, enforcing ownership rights on property is surely part of regular capitalism?

[kenjackson]

If you can’t figure this out on your own, I know I won’t succeed in explaining it to you.