Suppose Lady Gaga writes and records a new song. It's a hit. We say it's a hit because millions of people are happy to pay 99ยข for a recording of the song. Lady Gaga receives millions of dollars. Each fan receives a song they enjoy. Has anyone been harmed? If you ask me "why we allow individuals to extract so much from the economy in the 1st place" I am inclined to say that it is not my business to tell Lady Gaga or her fans what to do, as long as they are not bothering me. Millions of sales, initiated voluntarily by generally satisfied customers, appears to me a mountain of evidence that people are using their resources as they choose to improve their own lives.
I dont know. I question the use of the word "voluntary" in this American society where you're literally bombarded with marketing and outside influences trying to direct your life from birth for the purpose of profit more than anything else. I mean, from my current perspective, what you're saying is that those millions of people are the architects of their own suffering by allowing a select few to control the resource used as a means of survival in the system (money.)
Do you believe that, if you or someone you approve of can control the way others behave, you will make better decisions for them than they do?the word "voluntary"
You are concerned that advertising influences the way people spend their money, yet you want to talk about "why we allow" people to receive money in exchange for goods and services. If you do not allow people to sell stuff, you are directly controlling them.