"Behind every great fortune there is a great crime."

[MrDibble]

@Cheesesteak

I don’t see how one can amass a minuscule pittance without that form of theft known as property.

Of course one can.

[Der_Trihs]

@MrDibble

.But it is all owned - by the commons. That is who the property owner steals from when he fences off more than he’s actively using himself - he steals from all of us.

Except that the vast majority of “all of us” don’t want to live that way. We have a collective agreement among our society that I can have my property, the guy over there can have his property, and we both respect that. The “commons” simply isn’t interested in owning everything, and granting property rights by free consent is not theft.

[MrDibble]

@Der_Trihs

Except that the vast majority of “all of us” don’t want to live that way.

Oh, I agree. But that doesn’t make it right. That just makes it tyrrany of the majority.

We have a collective agreement among our society that I can have my property, the guy over there can have his property, and we both respect that. The “commons” simply isn’t interested in owning everything

Actually, when asked, they often answer that yes, they are interested in owning everything - everywhere where communism was installed at some point. They may not continue to believe that, but they were at some point.

, and granting property rights by free consent is not theft.

I didn’t consent to having my country chopped up into parcels of land in the past. It most certainly was stolen from me.

[MrDibble]

@Der_Trihs

We have a collective agreement among our society that I can have my property, the guy over there can have his property, and we both respect that.

ETA: It still sounds like you’re confusing personal property with private property. People are free to have property, they’re not free to own property - like land, for instance.

[septimus]

If the question were “Behind most great fortunes there is a great crime” the answer would be No. As stated, the question is just silly.

@msmith537

It’s absurd in this day and age. Although I’m sure the anti-capitalist crowd will be in here soon enough to disagree.

I’m not sure the “day and age” is relevant. Just as Bill Gates is rewarded for the stewardship which made all Microsoft employees and stockholders prosper, so the early de Medicis were rewarded for their stewardship of Florence. And so on. I don’t know when “this day and age” is supposed to begin and a presumed earlier evil age end, but Andrew Carnegie operated during the “Robber Baron Age,” was one of the richest men ever, and, AFAIK, was rewarded for business acumen, not crime.

(As an aside, Microsoft’s crimes were very serious; I’ve been drawn into debates on this topic before at SDMB; usually to find my debating opponent eventually admit he/she knows little or nothing about Operating Systems, Microsoft business practices, etc. :smack: )

The reference to “anti-capitalist crowd” seems peculiar. Many at SDMB are left-of-center but (aside from Commissar who’s probably BANNED by now) I can think of only two SDMB regulars who’ve professed anti-capitalism. Doesn’t it take three to make a crowd?