How much of that "real value" correlates with currently held value? By your metric Bell Labs should be worth more than any other company in existence.
Having loads of money isn't just about generating value. It's about extracting value.
Having loads of money isn't just about generating value. It's about extracting value.
It might lag a bit, but almost exactly. That's the whole idea. Real household incomes in the US from 1950 to 2000 very nearly doubled, and purchasing power increased even more. The 'rich get richer' is irrelevant if everyone else is, too.
> By your metric Bell Labs should be worth more than any other company in existence.
The fact that they aren't means that no, they shouldn't be. It's the capitalism equivalent of "the guy with a great idea for an app". If you aren't actually delivering that value to people that need it, you aren't getting paid for it.
> Having loads of money isn't just about generating value. It's about extracting value.
Generating and extracting value are the same thing, ignoring the connotation.
If you create a device where, with one press of a big red button, you can cure cancer/world hunger/war/disease, but you never actually press that button? You haven't actually created any value. You haven't done anything.
> If you create a device where, with one press of a big red button, you can cure cancer/world hunger/war/disease, but you never actually press that button?
What if you create such a device and decide to publicly share the design, with no plans to monopolize it? You'd probably be the lose financially, but did you not create the most value?
Have Linux or Git created no real value except for the companies that can build service models around them?