from a financial perspective, the job comes with zero (or near zero) monetary risk.
The person risking "billions" in capital is taking "billions" in monetary risk (the weighting depending on what the investment is - bonds are less risky than shares, for example).
And they stand to gain far more than someone working for $20 an hour.
Over the last 50 years the values of investments have far far outpaced growth in earnings. If a millionaire doesn't invest and make captial gains, what does he do with his money? Keep it in a box under the bed?
> And they stand to gain far more than someone working for $20 an hour.
And a lawyer gets paid $200/hr. What are you comparing? I'm not talking about whether it's "fair" that someone can be earning so little when there exists billionairs. That's for the philosophers and social commentators to endless debate.
But someone working for $20/hr earns that money, with zero risk of not receiving it after services rendered. Someone investing money is not guaranteed a return.
> If a millionaire doesn't invest and make captial gains, what does he do with his money?
So you're saying that because said millionaire has "no choice", he would be forced to invest and thus, society could leech more off him?
The person risking "billions" in capital is taking "billions" in monetary risk (the weighting depending on what the investment is - bonds are less risky than shares, for example).