The difference between "Makers" and "Takers" is a common abbreviation for the economics of production vs consumption.
Andy Kessler offers a twist:
Makers vs. Taylor Swift Shakers
Buying tickets to her concerts won’t boost the economy and create societal wealth.
Excerpts:
...
There are two sides of the economy: the productive side and the spend side. You can create wealth by learning or you can spend it. We have makers and, appropriate to Swifties, shakers.
In April, Bernard Arnault, chairman of luxury goods maker LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton, briefly became the world’s richest man as
’s stock was temporarily in the dumpster. Now Elon Musk is back. Bloomberg tracks the wealthiest daily. After Messrs. Musk and Arnault are ’s Jeff Bezos, ’s Larry Ellison and ’s Bill Gates. Françoise Bettencourt Meyers of cosmetics company , at No. 13, is the world’s richest woman. The list intertwines tech, luxury, energy and retail.Most of those near the top of the list are makers. They do more with less, while the spending side, such as Mr. Arnault’s brands, sells less for more. This is the difference between mass production and custom products. Let’s face it, a $4,650 Louis Vuitton “khaki and beige empreinte calfskin leather with polished brass” tote has the same utility as a paper bag from Safeway. That isn’t productivity. On the flip side, Amazon can deliver you a handbag tomorrow. Manufacturing and retail logistics run cheaper every year because of Amazon, Microsoft and Oracle data centers. This is how wealth is created now. Louis Vuitton is how it’s spent. See the difference?
Tesla straddles both sides. Investors are betting, heck, praying, that Teslas, basically low-margin cars, become productive autonomous machines, and they might if their Full Self-Driving mode stops running stop signs.
The economy needs both sides. But here’s something to think about: Both bring joy, but only one drives progress. We all consume, but progress happens when we postpone consumption and invest. Produce first; spend later. Consumption informs the supply side, which is where learning and societal wealth creation take place. Concert tickets and fashion reduce savings and investment. Production learns; consumption burns.
Yes, we need basic essentials. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs: Food, shelter and health should be coupled with love and belonging and a sense of connection. But at some point, the pyramid turns from needs to wants, with squishy stuff like esteem, self-actualization and even transcendence. Delivering these can be a profitable business, but does that create societal wealth? It more creates self-satisfaction....
Productivity is a game of abundance. We went from five transistors on an integrated circuit in 1958 to billions today. Million-dollar computers turned into $500 laptops, and now $50 smartphones. The old corner market was nice, but Walmart has more than 10,000 stores, each with about 140,000 items. Amazon and Walmart now each have more than 350 million items for sale online. That’s abundance.
Luxury, on the other hand, relies on scarcity: Hermès scarves, $50 million homes in the Hamptons, Tiffany jewelry, Breguet watches, $4,300 bottles of 2019 Screaming Eagle wine, Four Seasons over-water bungalow suites, meals at the French Laundry (a Gavin Newsom favorite)—it’s travel, restaurants, wine, jewelry, art. The more exclusive, the more expensive. I like the expression “peacocking”: showing off money and status, often to overcome insecurities. But self-actualization does nothing for society. Same for alcohol, tobacco, drugs and gambling.
...
Mass customization is the AI-enhanced future. Abundance means that luxury and exclusiveness will erode and move further up Maslow’s pyramid, from needs to wants to “I desire a little me time.”
There will always be two sides to the economy, but I’m suspicious of those who charge more for less. They are exploiting wealth, not creating it. Ultimately today’s luxuries will become tomorrow’s mass-customized goods and services. AI anxiety therapists that sound like Ms. Swift are coming. That’s the side of progress.
