Somebody Somebody wrote: [a dogmatic rant about a mythical "working class"]
BB] Yes, people must consume less, but that does not mean we must have less. We only have what we didn't consume yet. Income and consumption will not yield any wealth if items have zero life-span.
When we confuse income and wealth we obscure solutions. Income is a flow; wealth is a stock.
I don't follow you. "Stock" as used here is meaningless except in terms of capitalist relations. People live on what they consume today. (E.g., in a blizzard at 10 below one's survival depends on 'consuming' rather warm clothing outside and some kind of heat production inside.) So what exactly are you talking about.