I agree that only the most ruthless can get more and that is what capitalism is all about […]
I want to refer you back to my reply to your other comment wherein I am trying to make a distinction between the benefits of bottom-up free markets and the undesirable ruthlessness required by a top-down power vacuums. The difference is that a power vacuum means that in order to maintain top-down control, the participants must use that top-down control is ways that are deleterious to the group outcome. IOW the incentives are not aligned between group optimization and organizational control of the system. Precisely in game theory this is known as a Prisoner’s dilemma.
it takes hard work, it takes luck, maybe skills, and some make a lot of money and some are very poor and I believe that is better than socialism
That isn’t top-down ruthlessness. You’re describing the attributes of the beneficial bottom-up free market which produces optimal group outcomes. When the free market fails it is because there’s some top-down power vacuum interfering. But over a long enough time horizon, the free market disintermediates that power vacuum and optimal outcomes ultimately prevail.
The free market is not a Prisoner’s dilemma. The free market anneals (over sufficient time) to maximum entropy (i.e. maximum diversity and uncertainty) per the Second Law of Thermodynamics and thus is not deleterious.
can you start your own social network if you haven't already
I have been working on the design for it for a long time…
RE: Critical Analysis of Steem and Why I'm Invested