> The origin of this system was not created through free-market-capitalist methods.
Is that relevant?
> But the men and women who take on risk to pay them are rewarded.
Yes, but that's the interesting part. The actual exceptional people are, almost invariably, the scientists and doctors, and engineers who possess unique backgrounds, education, and frequently unique cognitive abilities. Many people have invested large sums of money to gain the unique education that allows them to purse. And then suddenly any speculator is considered to have "taken risk" by funding these people? And they get the lion's share of the reward, while it may take years just for the actual inventor to pay back the loans. Meanwhile the funder could be "anyone with money" and now they simply have more money.
Sometimes people who like capitalism talk about a Meritocracy, but that word is deceptive in this case because it's a meritocracy of products, not a meritocracy of people.
Is that relevant?
> But the men and women who take on risk to pay them are rewarded.
Yes, but that's the interesting part. The actual exceptional people are, almost invariably, the scientists and doctors, and engineers who possess unique backgrounds, education, and frequently unique cognitive abilities. Many people have invested large sums of money to gain the unique education that allows them to purse. And then suddenly any speculator is considered to have "taken risk" by funding these people? And they get the lion's share of the reward, while it may take years just for the actual inventor to pay back the loans. Meanwhile the funder could be "anyone with money" and now they simply have more money.
Sometimes people who like capitalism talk about a Meritocracy, but that word is deceptive in this case because it's a meritocracy of products, not a meritocracy of people.