unfreeradical

Much of our perception is logarithmic, which is predictable, since patterns occur from proportion of quantities. Absolute quantities are meaningless in themselves. Even ten dollars as a quantity is meaningless except through prior experience understanding the value of a single dollar. Every value except the smallest is tenfold greater than some other value of at least some consequence.

Simply, owners demand for themselves more than they pretend to allow for workers.

Sure. Much of your observations speaks to the more conceptual differences between the millionaire and billionaire with respect to role in society. Workers generate plenty of wealth, more than enough for all to live well.

Billionaires generate no wealth, only hoard the wealth generated by workers.

Since workers were born into a world that affirms private property, they obviously never gave it their consent.

It is just a fiction that developed its own life by the whip, blade, and gun, and also by the pen and press.

Most of the work of leftist criticisms has been simply deconstructing entrenched doctrine, to help expand consciousness, and to build capacity for liberation.

Ellerman seems to prefer instead constructing his own layer of obfuscation. It may antagonize the wage system, but it declines to deconstruct the deeper nature of moral ideals, social constructs, and legal frameworks.

It is worth becoming familiar with leftist criticisms of natural rights.

It feels elusive how anyone could spend so much, but controlling the content of mass media has been of great service for the interests of the Kochs and the Wilkses.

For you, is it more significant that many may achieve such wealth, or that many more may not do so?

I am not denying any of the differences, but the differences you both have with billionaires is even greater, as the billionaire occupies a role in society of power and domination, through control of resources and assets that are utilized socially, for the necessity that we produce our shared sustenance.

Mostly, Ellerman’s approach is weighty and unwieldy, by capturing or complicating constructs that leftists have identified as unnecessary, unrobust, and outright fictitious.

Most leftists have no need for recovering natural rights, nor even have need of natural rights.

Workers might simply rebel against the exploiters, because workers have no wish and no need for being exploited.

You are probably not vastly different from a millionaire, just someone with less pomp and perhaps pretentiousness than some millionaires may have.

You may even know someone who secretly holds such wealth but feels too embarrassed to make it known.

A billionaire is someone who has the social role of controlling a vast section of society, through private ownership of resources and assets that are needed by others for use.

Ellerman, according to my understanding, has tended to approach liberal defenses of private property by attaching further abstractions and obfuscation that produce no particular further clarity above established leftist criticisms.