The self attribution fallacy
https://www.monbiot.com/2011/11/07/the-self-attribution-fallacy/
If wealth was the inevitable result of hard work and enterprise, every woman in Africa would be a millionaire. The claims that the ultra-rich 1% make for themselves – that they are possessed of unique intelligence or creativity or drive – are examples of the self-attribution fallacy. This means crediting yourself with outcomes for which you weren’t responsible. Many of those who are rich today got there because they were able to capture certain jobs. This capture owes less to talent and intelligence than to a combination of the ruthless exploitation of others and accidents of birth, as such jobs are taken disproportionately by people born in certain places and into certain classes.
The findings of the psychologist Daniel Kahneman, winner of a Nobel economics prize, are devastating to the beliefs that financial high-fliers entertain about themselves.
Capitalism rewards fraud. It’s the true american way.
Case in point - when imitation crab came out in the 80s it was freakin’ delicious - tasted just like crab, and dirt cheap in comparison. But over the years they seem to have beem putting in less and less of whatever actual crab material gave it crab flavor, so now it’s pretty much just nondescript fish + orange dye. A bad imitation of imitation crab. Instead of enjoying wonderful inventions like these we have to ruin them a little at a time so somebody can make a teensy bit more profit each time, until they’re crap.
The boiling frog metaphor comes to mind.
It also rewards putting words like Freedom and Liberty in the names of laws that restrict freedom and liberty.
We need MAFA. Make America Free Again.
The problem is both parties hate freedom when it suites them. Which is most of the time.
No, it also rewards authors of protect-children-laws with underage sex
German saying: “a good horse only jumps ass high as it must.”
There are no bonus points for clearing the hurdle with space to spare. You have to jump high enough, but no more.
a good horse only jumps ass high
🙂↕️
🙏
Capitalism rewards the lucky and the sociopathic.
It’s in the name. Capitalism rewards capital.
Capitalism rewards capital. It’s literally in the name.
No system in existence and outside existence would reward artists even if it is specifically designed to reward artists. it’s a monkey’s paw bullshit trap.
To quote the article itself “Jenny Dagg, a Maynooth University sociologist who studied the scheme, said it was a win for all but noted that eligible artists could not live solely on the weekly payments, which were considered supplementary income.”
one way or another this kind of stuff always ends up being a scheme with heavy bias towards metropolies.
I really dislike the implications here about which profession has which trait
Gamblers
And nepotism
Mostly nepotism tbh. Stock market is only gambling for the masses, Wall Street has enough information that it’s no longer gambling for them.
*inside traders
No it rewards psychopathic and megalomaniacal tendencies to a disproportionate degree, with catastrophic runaway consequences
This implies neurosurgeons aren’t talented
Well, it’s not rocket science…
Spoken like a true butthurt neurosurgeon
Surely matters how we measure talent.
Surgeons and engineers make bank last I checked, so that’s a bit of a funny example. Markets do reward in-demand practical skills.
What societies (in general) really reward is dumb luck and networking, though.
The thing society rewards most is already having lots of capital to throw around. No skill, talent, work ethic, or even connectedness is as important as simply having assets. Our society has regressed to reward being rich over everything else.
If you go down the list of big billionaires, most of them didn’t start as billionaires. For the most part, they started out in the comfortable “upper-middle” class, like a lot of Lemmy users, and then got involved in a startup that took them to the top (edit: luck).
It’s not surprising, really. If you just have inherited capital and no extra luck, the best you can do is the same 10% rate of return as everyone else. (Although coming from a rich family is both luck and connections, itself)
Our society has regressed to reward being rich over everything else.
You say that like bloodline first and then wealth was better. That is what came before.
Ehm mister or not,
What engineers does society in 2026 reward? Last time I checked everyone is fucked
The people at FAANGS (or whatever they’re calling it now) famously start with wages that would be the absolute peak of someone else’s career. Never mind comparing to an unskilled worker.
I know less about what physical/real engineers make in 2026, but I doubt it’s changed that much.
Real engineer here, mechanical working to design medical devices like plates and screws for trauma cases.
We average around $100k across the US, and on the extreme end can top out around $200k, but that’s a rare case. Typical top end is $150k with I’d say at least 12 years if experience.
Starting salary typically $70k.
This is for places that are average COL, so not San Francisco, and also not Alabama.
Yeah, that’s decent. Not fuck-you money, but decent.
OP asked for any example, so I went with FAANGS, but wages there are inflated by being a bunch of monopolies all headquartered in the same place. Last I heard a senior dev in Canada makes like 60k.
A senior dev in Canada also makes 6 figures.
But some recruiters label beginner positions as senior for whatever reason.
Well, maybe the guy I was talking to was underpaid. It’s definitely a lot less than in the 'states, though.
Yeah, buddy, hate to bring it to you, but software engineers are not the real engineers. We’re just monkeys repeating something that we barely heard of.
You can start working as a software engineer just after school. Imagine an aerospace, civil, or electrical engineer without proper education.
Okay, sure, the guy that mostly copy-pastes/vibecodes javascript is not on level with a rocket scientist. What about, like, Linus Torvalds, though? The complexity involved in a big codebase outstrips even the most complicated aircraft. Nobody’s saying mathematicians aren’t serious thinkers, and yet, we’re putting in a whole lot of effort, with things like Lean, to catch up with coders.
They aren’t accredited like “real” engineers, but that might be a matter of where we are in history more than anything. Charles Parsons didn’t have to certify anything when he was building the first dreadnoughts. Both fields are about designing new technology, and that’s basically what defines the word “engineer”.
Median salary for a surgeon is $450,000/year.
Someone with $10,000,000 in VOO can withdraw $450,000/year, and still compound their wealth year over year, without working at all. The absolute worst case scenario is that they start doing this at the start of a recession, like mid 2007, in which case, they would STILL be compounding their wealth year over year, with the exception of the short time it took to dip.
Simply having $10,000,000 and sitting on your ass > Being a surgeon.
Oh yeah, and that’s all before taxes.
So yes, to some extent, society rewards skill. But it is FAR more rewarding to the people who already have wealth.
Yeah, but how do you get 10 million dollars?
While these answers are correct, it’s doesn’t really say much about what traits are rewarded. It’s kind of tautological - if we assume you’ve started ahead, you’ll be ahead. Otherwise, it’s mostly luck, with a bit of knowing the right people, which is also down to luck.
Maybe what you meant is that wealth shouldn’t be permanent(-ish). Which is valid. It’s just not a matter of personality, like everything else on the list in OP.
Yeah, but how do you get 10 million dollars?
It doesn’t matter. Investments do not care where the money comes from.
You worked as a surgeon for 20 years while living with parents and not paying bills? $10 million.
Your great great grandfather was a plumber and built up some wealth and your great grandfather was an electrician and built up more wealth, and… your father works in real estate and all of these people set you up with a trust fund and you start out with $2 million, and then you withdraw 100k per year to live on, doing nothig else for 17 years, and your fund slowly climbs to $10 million. Well, that’s also $10 million.
You’re one of Nancy Pelosi’s kids and she gives you a $10 million fund on your 18th birthday? Thats $10 million.
Do you see now how having $10 million doesn’t reward the traits of any of these people? It only rewards having $10 million. It does not matter how you acquired it.
Yes, those are some great and realistic examples.
I don’t want to be obtuse, here, repeating myself more than necessary, but this bit was important:
Maybe what you meant is that wealth shouldn’t be permanent(-ish). Which is valid. It’s just not a matter of personality, like everything else on the list in OP.
FWIW my best guess for how OP would have ended it, is “it rewards being evil”. Usually that’s where people go.
I guess luck isn’t really a personality trait, either, but it’s what you can personally have that allows you to climb relative to other people with the same start.
and that person with $10 million succesfully escaped being a wageslave with the help of their predecessors
Also, Fauci made bank off of covid. And everyone agrees he’s a scientist.
Uhh… source?
Capitalism rewards the best at gaining power. All systems are subject the vulnerability of people seeking power instead of wisdom. Even American Democracy.
Especially American Democracy.
“Even American democracy” you mean the system/country with all the greedy tech bros in it, who it actively protects?
I’m not interested is arguing about the distinction you fail to see.
Your lack of clarity is not my responsibility.
You said “even”, which for literate people means that what follows it has some particular advantage when it comes to not being whatever came before the “even”. The US is the epicenter of global capitalism; it’s the first to go, no the last.
But your understanding is.
A wonderful comeback deftly avoiding the bulk of my comment because that’s where your entire argument falls apart.
If I agree with you, will you be content and go away?
I don’t talk to people to “win” against them, so no, and fuck you for thinking that lying to me would make me happy.
in before some child comes, downvotes people and bullshits about how Elon is actually very clever
I’ve noticed a trend amongst most Musk defenders now and general billionaire simps. They have the emotional maturity of a13 year old, they never really grew up in high school so are so stunted developmentally they’re a decade behind at the least.
So, they’re defending Musk because he’s one of them?
Basically.
