The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money.
Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.
But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that’d still be keeping his feet dry in ten years’ time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.
Men at Arms
So anyways, the rich got rich through exploitation of people. This comment leans towards the lies right wingers teach their children that Bill Gates eats homemade sandwiches and wears cheap sweatpants, therefore learn to scrimp and save, implying you’ll be rich.
It implies literally the opposite, the rich literally buy more expensive products, and further is about a fantasy medieval society going through the beginnings of the Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution.
This particular phenomena has been noted in more detail as a fact of economics, IE it’s expensive to be poor, because the poor don’t choose low quality products they have to buy them because they can’t afford the larger upfront cost.
That depends a bit on the situation, I have seen some people from rich companies who learned things like in the quote from Sir Terry Pratchett, aka the cheapest is not always the best option.
Some people also got rich in the first place because they either studied hard and got to be a specialist earning hundreds of thousands a year for their job and others just came with the right invention in the right time, and we overpaid for it. You see that especially in tech where the costs where generally pretty low (especially bookkeeping wise since the original owner’s hours are generally not added in the bookkeeping) and they sold it for a lot.
Its worth making the distinction between the ‘rich’ and the ‘super-rich’. The top 10% (in terms of wealth) own 70% of all US wealth, but then the top 1% owns half of that! So, relatively speaking, the ‘rich’ are poor compared to the ‘super-rich’. No one makes it to that 1% without exploiting fellow human beings. Numbers source: Capital in the 21st Century - Thomas Piketty.
That’s not the point Pratchett is making here. He is pointing to the fact that Vimes cannot afford the good boots. Ever. He explains there is no way for him to even save up for leather boots. It may also be worth noting that that character then benefit from having had bare soles and it becomes a kind of superpower to read the ground.
That said there is a big flaw in merotocracy, which is that the super rich have exponentially disappeared from that arena and owns the world now, and they don’t stop harvesting more at the detriment of the planet while actually not doing anything with the money extracted.
-Sir Terry Pratchett
It costs a lot of money to be poor.
So anyways, the rich got rich through exploitation of people. This comment leans towards the lies right wingers teach their children that Bill Gates eats homemade sandwiches and wears cheap sweatpants, therefore learn to scrimp and save, implying you’ll be rich.
Absolute morons.
It implies literally the opposite, the rich literally buy more expensive products, and further is about a fantasy medieval society going through the beginnings of the Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution.
This particular phenomena has been noted in more detail as a fact of economics, IE it’s expensive to be poor, because the poor don’t choose low quality products they have to buy them because they can’t afford the larger upfront cost.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
That depends a bit on the situation, I have seen some people from rich companies who learned things like in the quote from Sir Terry Pratchett, aka the cheapest is not always the best option.
Some people also got rich in the first place because they either studied hard and got to be a specialist earning hundreds of thousands a year for their job and others just came with the right invention in the right time, and we overpaid for it. You see that especially in tech where the costs where generally pretty low (especially bookkeeping wise since the original owner’s hours are generally not added in the bookkeeping) and they sold it for a lot.
Its worth making the distinction between the ‘rich’ and the ‘super-rich’. The top 10% (in terms of wealth) own 70% of all US wealth, but then the top 1% owns half of that! So, relatively speaking, the ‘rich’ are poor compared to the ‘super-rich’. No one makes it to that 1% without exploiting fellow human beings. Numbers source: Capital in the 21st Century - Thomas Piketty.
That’s not the point Pratchett is making here. He is pointing to the fact that Vimes cannot afford the good boots. Ever. He explains there is no way for him to even save up for leather boots. It may also be worth noting that that character then benefit from having had bare soles and it becomes a kind of superpower to read the ground.
That said there is a big flaw in merotocracy, which is that the super rich have exponentially disappeared from that arena and owns the world now, and they don’t stop harvesting more at the detriment of the planet while actually not doing anything with the money extracted.
deleted by creator