Free access to scriptures religious leaders try to censor
Capitalism, the way it currently is, is awesome, in helping productive people create wealth.
However, many still complaints that capitalism leave many people poor.
I think I have a way to solve this and this can be done by capitalists irrelevant of governments’ help.
We can end poverty through capitalism.
Being still reasonably selfish.
No donation. Donation and altruism sucks anyway.
Being reasonably capitalistic
May actually be legal (it’s legal in my country) though may requires some loopholes.
Why are people poor? Many reasons. But the big reason is daddy is poor. Why is daddy poor? Because mom choose poor man as father of their children. And why is that?
There are many complex factors. However, the way I see it, there are too many land mines when it comes to choosing a rich man as daddy. So many rich men do not want to have children with too many women. Alimony is expensive for the rich. Child support is expensive for the rich. Prostitution is illegal. Sugar relationship is border line illegal. Polygamy is illegal. Government regulate marriage.
Simple. Use capitalism on sex and reproductive market.
Currently western civilization is awesome when it comes to capitalism on most stuffs.
However, when it comes to sex, suddenly people are communists. Sex for consideration is illegal. Women shouldn’t consider money in offering sex but can consider government infested marriage.
Instead of marrying, rich men can just pay women to give children. Have more children.
Can this be done?
The main problem is transaction complexity.
For example, a billionaire can agree to pay a woman 1 million dollar to give him an heir and raise the child. However, what would stop the woman from suing for more money after the baby is made?
In my country a woman cannot sue for child support and there is no link between wealth of father and amount of child support. This lead to another problem. How does the woman know that the rich man will provide after she get knocked up?
Sure we often have deals where the man agree to support a woman for life and their children together. In exchange the women give sex and the children to the man. This deal is what marriage is or used to be or should have been.
However, marriage is heavily regulated by the state. The state is obsessed with ensuring there is one woman for every man than ensuring the child is rich. The state acts as if all women want to be the only one instead of having more money or better genes. Monogamy seems to be the goal of anything state sanctioned.
There are many solutions.
Split deals into smaller pieces. Instead of paying women to give children, pay her for sex first. However, this maybe illegal due to anti prostitution law. However, in many country prostitution is legal and even in US sugar relationship is legal.
Build reputation. A rich man can knock a woman up and be a responsible dad for his biological children. That way other women will know that he’s not dead beat.
Libertarian court. Both agree to make marriage and stipulate that if they have disputes the dispute is resolved in libertarian court. The man can be a multimillionaire or billionaire that has no problem ensuring the child is well supported and put some collateral.
Move to more sensible state. In most countries child support is not linked to the man’s wealth. In Texas USA, there is a max amount of child support.
How will this eliminate poverty?
Simple. Rich men tend to have richer children. Also most men want more than one women. The children will simply have more resources to make it. Also rich men often have talents that make them rich in the first place. So a high IQ rich men, for example, can hire high IQ women to produce smart children that will, given resources, more likely build empire.
Rich men bequeath talents, connections, IQ, and even businesses to his children. This gets leveraged.
If Bill Gates spend 10 million on a ghetto child, that child will still unlikely make another Microsoft. But if Bill Gates spend 10 million on his own child, and say he has 100 children, each are quite likely to make another Microsoft.
The more women end up with rich men, less women will end up with poor men. So less poverty.
What about women that don’t want money? What about women that don’t prefer the rich? What about women that want government infested marriage for “legitimacy” or whatever? What about women that want to make money like men.
Who cares. Let them choose. However, now it’s obvious that if a child is poor it’s mainly because of mom’s choice. This will greatly undermine justification for welfare.
We can say, look, your twin sister choose to give a sugar daddy a child. So her child is rich. You choose to get a job till you’re old and marry without considering money. So your child is poor. Why should women that pick better decisions for her children be taxed to pay for welfare of women that pick good decisions?
So rich capitalists can eliminate poverty by first being a great capitalist and make more money. Then they can use capitalism to acquire more women and produce more children. Then they take care THEIR own children. No need to care about others’ children. Just take care of our own children and make sure our children build business empire too.
Then more children will have rich dad and better genes. Poverty will be gone by itself.This can even eliminate all poverties in the world.
Just import sugar babies from poor countries. Any country that fail to embrace capitalism will be poor anyway and of course their women want richer guys and higher standard of living.
Look at women in Afganistan, for example. Rather than being sex slaves by Taliban, they will be better off looking for a rich sugar daddy in say Europe or Asia.
Capitalism is the solution for prosperity. It will also be the solution for eliminating poverty. Let the greatest among us be the one providing the greatest service and values to the largest number of customers.