3 ms·

The author is trying really hard to trivialize inequality. First, comparing Rockefeller with $1B.. except he was worth what would be $340B in todays dollars. So

The author is trying really hard to trivialize inequality. First, comparing Rockefeller with $1B.. except he was worth what would be $340B in todays dollars. So first, he lowers the topline of the comparison. He says a letter overnight is impossible.. even though the telegraph existed for over 70 years at that point. Then he throws in some more trivial inconveniences: phones being attached to the wall. Then he adds in a few lies like being unable to get foreign food in NY in 1916. Hey guess what? NY had plenty of immigration in 1900, and Italian, German, Jewish, Chinese and Eastern European food was easily found: http://leitesculinaria.com/10348/writings-dining-through-the-decades-american-food-history.html http://leitesculinaria.com/10348/writings-dining-through-the... And while many of the points are true.. like it taking days to travel to Europe.. he forgets that as a billionaire, you can send people on your behalf, and they can telegraph information back to you from Europe. You, as a billionaire, never needs to make that trip. And if you're really worried about your limo breaking down.. as a billionaire, why not just have a few dozen follow you around, just in case? (Edit: also there were horse drawn and electric taxis operating in NY since the 1890s.. and even if he didn't want to take a taxi, it would still be useful for sending someone to notify whoever that he would be late for the meeting (something he pretends can only be done with a phone, and therefore impossible in 1916.)) He spends no time thinking about how he would actually utilize the resources of Rockefeller in 1916.. but would trade it all for a phone that isn't attached to the wall. Sure.

zone411 11y ago
>>>First, comparing Rockefeller with $1B.. except he was worth what would be $340B in todays dollars. So first, he lowers the topline of the comparison. Does $1 billion vs $340 billion mean even a small improvement in the quality of life in 1916? I doubt it. >>>He says a letter overnight is impossible.. even though the telegraph existed for over 70 years at that point. True about the telegraph but you ignored the part about the packages. >>>Then he adds in a few lies like being unable to get foreign food in NY in 1916. Hey guess what? NY had plenty of immigration in 1900, and Italian, German, Jewish, Chinese and Eastern European food was easily found How about Thai? Japanese? Turkish? Colombian? Vegetarian? Cocktails? >>>like it taking days to travel to Europe.. he forgets that as a billionaire, you can send people on your behalf That's only when not traveling for pleasure. >>>And if you're really worried about your limo breaking down.. as a billionaire, why not just have a few dozen follow you around, just in case? Good point.
- rgbrenner 11y ago
  > How about Thai? Japanese? Turkish? Colombian? Vegetarian? Cocktails? If you read the article I linked to, you would see that you could get bear and elephant meat in NY. Can I argue the same.. That since elephant meat is no longer on the menu, that 2016 has poor choice of food? Oh how we suffer. Of course you think that's silly.. because it is.. if elephant meat isn't available, you'll eat hamburger or whatever, and you'll be happy with it. And that's the same as it was in 1916. Fact is that there was plenty of variety of food available in NY in 1916. (Edit: and don't forget, in this story you're a billionaire.. so if you really want Thai.. you can spend a few million to send someone to Thailand and bring back a chef that can make it for you. $1M to someone worth $340B, is the same as $0.13 to someone worth $45,000 -- the median US net worth: http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/11/news/economy/middle-class-wealth/ http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/11/news/economy/middle-class-we... )

zone411 11y ago

>>>First, comparing Rockefeller with $1B.. except he was worth what would be $340B in todays dollars. So first, he lowers the topline of the comparison. Does $1 billion vs $340 billion mean even a small improvement in the quality of life in 1916? I doubt it. >>>He says a letter overnight is impossible.. even though the telegraph existed for over 70 years at that point. True about the telegraph but you ignored the part about the packages. >>>Then he adds in a few lies like being unable to get foreign food in NY in 1916. Hey guess what? NY had plenty of immigration in 1900, and Italian, German, Jewish, Chinese and Eastern European food was easily found How about Thai? Japanese? Turkish? Colombian? Vegetarian? Cocktails? >>>like it taking days to travel to Europe.. he forgets that as a billionaire, you can send people on your behalf That's only when not traveling for pleasure. >>>And if you're really worried about your limo breaking down.. as a billionaire, why not just have a few dozen follow you around, just in case? Good point.

rgbrenner 11y ago
> How about Thai? Japanese? Turkish? Colombian? Vegetarian? Cocktails? If you read the article I linked to, you would see that you could get bear and elephant meat in NY. Can I argue the same.. That since elephant meat is no longer on the menu, that 2016 has poor choice of food? Oh how we suffer. Of course you think that's silly.. because it is.. if elephant meat isn't available, you'll eat hamburger or whatever, and you'll be happy with it. And that's the same as it was in 1916. Fact is that there was plenty of variety of food available in NY in 1916. (Edit: and don't forget, in this story you're a billionaire.. so if you really want Thai.. you can spend a few million to send someone to Thailand and bring back a chef that can make it for you. $1M to someone worth $340B, is the same as $0.13 to someone worth $45,000 -- the median US net worth: http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/11/news/economy/middle-class-wealth/ http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/11/news/economy/middle-class-we... )