Is Selling Shares in Yourself the Way of the Future?
newyorker.com
newyorker.com
Speaking only for myself: Why the fuck would I take on a loan I can never repay?
Same reason startup founders sell equity in their startup.
I'm still pretty firmly in the "humans are not mere assets" camp. They absolutely can be an asset, but I don't find it acceptable to treat them solely as assets.
For the same reason I don't believe slavery is moral.
I literally don't see any way to pitch this that doesn't devolve straight back to "you're selling yourself into serfdom/slavery". But if you can make an argument... go for it.
The Wikipedia page needs to be updated. The synopsis is woefully-lacking, and there are four books in the series:
Or is it just that no one has challenged whether this is legal or not?
Seems ripe for abuse.
I can't wait to see how this gets marketed. I envision it devolving into some sort of scheme to facilitate human trafficking before it gets shut down.
The more these wacky schemes proliferate, they destroy any trust worthiness the Internet once had, and they flood all the outlets we used to go to for valid information with ads... The future has been fraught with so much disappointment in terms of the Internet's promise from the early days. It's infected almost every aspect of business online.
Well, the future is a distopean's "told you so" generator confirmed.
If "own" means "control of a company", this is trivially proven false by comparing the price GOOG (without voting power) vs GOOGL (with voting power). The one with voting power actually trades lower than the one without voting power (probably due to better liquidity), which is not what we'd expect if control was "One big reason shares have value".
If "own" means "claim on future profits of the company", then it's also wrong because you don't need "enough" shares to have a claim on future profits. More is certainly better, but there isn't some arbitrary amount you have to reach to have "enough".
Surely nothing can go wrong.
The problem with shares is that for someone to buy something someone will have to sell something.
If shares are tied to you personally then you basicaly get a personal worth score ala black mirror implicitly in this.
People will play the system to increase the net share worth without producing anything that brings down prices of goods or improves the net-good of humanity.
This will also paralyize the system since people will be obsessed with this, thus everything else will suffer.
It's basicaly Instagram "I always look good look at my picture" but now that is tied to your financial survival.
It's basicaly "industrial capitalism" vs "financial capitalism."
Industrial captialism created abundance as it actually makes things more affordable to the masses.
But now financial capitalism (Wall street sheninigans etc...) is parasiticaly destroying everything by betting on the money itself.