Scratch-[vanities]
I think I can debunk a myth. The myth of the "ultra, ultra billionaire."
I have two aspects to address. One aspect is: a country is ultra, ultra billionaire. But we don't complain. This aspect allows us to say that both the money of a country and that of an ultra, ultra billionaire will be injected into the economy. "Injecting into the economy" is not what changes. Envy is also not worth it, I know it changes, because we don't envy a country, but a person, perhaps. But this aspect is bland. Even old: comparing country budgets with wealthy individuals and companies is nothing new.
I like the next aspect to analyze better. It involves automation.
The extreme case is easier to understand. Then we soften the extremes.
In the extreme case, the sole owner of a giant and profitable company reaches the point of automating everything, without losing, on the contrary, increasing profit and sales.
Under the first aspect, the only thing that changes is that he decides how to manage his own budget, not a group elected by the people.
But in the second aspect, it becomes interesting. He automated so much—one hundred percent—that in fact he doesn't even need to be in the company.
And he dies. But the company lives on.
Now let's exaggerate, because automating, and a lot, is increasingly normal, it's not an exaggeration.
Imagine that all the employees, advisors, shareholders, owners, of all the largest companies in the world: google, amazon, tesla, louis vuitton (lvmh group), volkswagen, bosch, apple, bmw, all the richest companies, that all their employees, top management and owners die. But that their robots manage to keep them all, without exception, running, without any human being involved. Only electricity (ecological, sustainable), posts on instagram, online sales, replenishment of supplies and stock, automated factories and distribution.
Money—trillions—only makes sense with, for, and by humans.
Entire factories work for free. Using self-sufficient water and energy. Keeping a planet even better than it already is.
There is no money for machines. Robots. Automatic posts. Autonomous delivery trucks.
This means very strange things. At least until we can understand better, slowly.
We call nature "god." As a “divine gift.”
She is there. Gives us everything. Asks for nothing in return. Water, nutrients, energy. Atoms, molecules.
Because all the richest factories in the world, with their employees, directors and shareholders disappeared, functioning non-stop, without any human being involved, immediately cease to ask for anything in return.
Let's assume that they are supplied with energy and water in a self-sufficient way. Let's think that they work with recyclable materials—if we think at the atomic level, there is no way to escape defining ourselves all as recyclers—of atoms of the planet—that is, it is enough to have self-sufficient energy to manipulate atoms, and we will have eternally recycled inputs. Atoms. Just like a tree does with what was, before, a seed.
This seems to indicate that specifically money—we started with the term "ultra, ultra billionaires," that is, money—is inexorably linked as nail and flesh to us, the famous human beings.
Because self-sufficient factories with no one around begin to have the same divine grace of abundance without asking anything in return from the plants and fruits that surround us.
Who could deal with this type of theme?
Notes to expand the mind.
Great reading! :)