Most other forms of “capital” seem to involve behavior-environment pairing. For instance: pointing guns outward from a plot of real estate where there is the possibility of drilling for oil. In other words, most other forms of capital involve violently holding onto some piece of material which is arbitrarily in the possession of one with the means of violence.

Information economies have created problems for this model, however, just as the entertainment industry has always done. Hence, oil mongers (the material/financial elite) often describe the entertainment industry as the “cultural elite.”

I’ve heard the term “propeller head” sometimes used to describe people in information science. This from people who rule imaginary real estate, with imaginary violence, but with enough influence that it can often affect people’s lives the way violence does.

In a sense, you are in the entertainment industry as well. Your capital is purely on the level of capabilities, which makes you suspiciously (heh heh) on the side of the socialists.

On the other hand, some socialists who happen to be CEOs (or other execs) tend to over-evaluate their capabilities, distorting the whole system by a feat of mythic/monolithic narcissism.

Not all CEOs.

I realize the average CEO doesn’t think of herself as a socialist.

I’m in favor of creating an economy that generates enough wealth and spreads it around enough that people are happier, healthier, safer, and more relaxed than they would be otherwise. If that’s socialism, then yeah, I’m all in favor. To a point, capitalism fulfilled those goals, but it seems like in the last 15-or-so years we passed some kind of change point and now it seems to be it’s actively moving us further from all of those goals.

- Stever

Keep it up.

Hear I might some latent socialist calling..?