4 ms·

This is hard to define and is subjective. I use a hard metric for my own definition that makes sense. Find a physical product that is fundamentally impossible

This is hard to define and is subjective. I use a hard metric for my own definition that makes sense. Find a physical product that is fundamentally impossible to be built by one man. Say a boeing 747. Find a man who has more wealth then the cost of a boeing 747. By common sense: if it is impossible for a man to build a 747 with his bare hands then it is impossible for a man to own more wealth then the cost of a 747 without going through trades and transactions that are unfair. If such a man exists then he attained his wealth through unfair transactions. This is my definition of unfair. You may have another definition and I respect that. IMO in the ideal world Bill Gates probably deserves to be a millionaire and billionaires would represent a perversion of wealth that is insanely obscene.

cjlars 9y ago
>if it is impossible for a man to build a 747 with his bare hands & >without going through trades and transactions that are unfair It's fundamentally impossible for one man to build even the microwave that preheats the meals inside a 747, but that's no reasonable threshold. The entirety of modern life is built on transacting goods and services that are fundamentally impossible to create alone -- are you trying to say that all transactions are unfair? Or just Bill Gates'? Or just transactions that are too skillfully done?
- crimsonalucard 9y ago
  This is not true at all. A microwave can be built by the knowledge and skills of a single man. Additionally you are not thinking holistically. Take your computer: a device that needs the manpower of thousands to create. Such a device is only as cheap as it is because of mass production on an automated factory line. The true value thus cannot be measured by an individual computer but by the intrinsic value of the technology as a whole. This is hard to measure. I chose a 747 because 747s are not produced on a robotic factory line. They are built by machinists, so each plane is a more accurate measure of a products' true value. I am saying that in a capitalist economy. The majority of transactions are unfair. The lower class gets screwed perpetually. This is a fact of life.
AnimalMuppet 9y ago
> By common sense: if it is impossible for a man to build a 747 with his bare hands then it is impossible for a man to own more wealth then the cost of a 747 without going through trades and transactions that are unfair. I don't consider that to be common sense at all. If nothing else, all the humans in the world put together couldn't make a 747 with their bare hands. And yet all the people in the world together have far more wealth than the cost of a 747. So I think there's something faulty in your logic. More to the point: Who was Gates unfair to? His own workers? He paid them well, in fact above market rates. His customers? They wanted his products more than they wanted their own money. It sounds like you're just looking at his wealth and saying "that's unfair" without having any idea of what he actually did that's unfair. That's... rather weak.
- crimsonalucard 9y ago
  >all the humans in the world put together couldn't make a 747 with their bare hands. How does this make sense. How do 747s exist if they are not created by our hands? Maybe it's my mistake, I am not precluding hands from using tools, as long as the tools are eventually made by hands somewhere along the supply chain. Lets not complicate the matter with deliberate nitpicking. This is not faulty logic, the fault is with you. >More to the point: Who was Gates unfair to? His own workers? He paid them well, in fact above market rates. His customers? They wanted his products more than they wanted their own money. I'm talking about his own workers. Market rate in India is 5 cents an hour. Market rate is rarely fair. If you think market rate is fair then you are highly highly mistaken. >It sounds like you're just looking at his wealth and saying "that's unfair" without having any idea of what he actually did that's unfair. That's... rather weak. Sounds like you made a claim about something I'm doing when I already told you my reasoning. Sounds like you didn't read what I wrote. I'll repeat the logic. He is being unfair because his wealth is to obscenely high for one man to own. What does that mean? It means what he "did" is underpay people working for him. Do I really need to spell out the logic? I am describing a dead body and I am calling the man with a bloody knife standing next the dead body the murderer and you are asking me to point out what he actually "did"
  - jimmies 9y ago

cjlars 9y ago

>if it is impossible for a man to build a 747 with his bare hands & >without going through trades and transactions that are unfair It's fundamentally impossible for one man to build even the microwave that preheats the meals inside a 747, but that's no reasonable threshold. The entirety of modern life is built on transacting goods and services that are fundamentally impossible to create alone -- are you trying to say that all transactions are unfair? Or just Bill Gates'? Or just transactions that are too skillfully done?

crimsonalucard 9y ago
This is not true at all. A microwave can be built by the knowledge and skills of a single man. Additionally you are not thinking holistically. Take your computer: a device that needs the manpower of thousands to create. Such a device is only as cheap as it is because of mass production on an automated factory line. The true value thus cannot be measured by an individual computer but by the intrinsic value of the technology as a whole. This is hard to measure. I chose a 747 because 747s are not produced on a robotic factory line. They are built by machinists, so each plane is a more accurate measure of a products' true value. I am saying that in a capitalist economy. The majority of transactions are unfair. The lower class gets screwed perpetually. This is a fact of life.

AnimalMuppet 9y ago

> By common sense: if it is impossible for a man to build a 747 with his bare hands then it is impossible for a man to own more wealth then the cost of a 747 without going through trades and transactions that are unfair. I don't consider that to be common sense at all. If nothing else, all the humans in the world put together couldn't make a 747 with their bare hands. And yet all the people in the world together have far more wealth than the cost of a 747. So I think there's something faulty in your logic. More to the point: Who was Gates unfair to? His own workers? He paid them well, in fact above market rates. His customers? They wanted his products more than they wanted their own money. It sounds like you're just looking at his wealth and saying "that's unfair" without having any idea of what he actually did that's unfair. That's... rather weak.

crimsonalucard 9y ago
>all the humans in the world put together couldn't make a 747 with their bare hands. How does this make sense. How do 747s exist if they are not created by our hands? Maybe it's my mistake, I am not precluding hands from using tools, as long as the tools are eventually made by hands somewhere along the supply chain. Lets not complicate the matter with deliberate nitpicking. This is not faulty logic, the fault is with you. >More to the point: Who was Gates unfair to? His own workers? He paid them well, in fact above market rates. His customers? They wanted his products more than they wanted their own money. I'm talking about his own workers. Market rate in India is 5 cents an hour. Market rate is rarely fair. If you think market rate is fair then you are highly highly mistaken. >It sounds like you're just looking at his wealth and saying "that's unfair" without having any idea of what he actually did that's unfair. That's... rather weak. Sounds like you made a claim about something I'm doing when I already told you my reasoning. Sounds like you didn't read what I wrote. I'll repeat the logic. He is being unfair because his wealth is to obscenely high for one man to own. What does that mean? It means what he "did" is underpay people working for him. Do I really need to spell out the logic? I am describing a dead body and I am calling the man with a bloody knife standing next the dead body the murderer and you are asking me to point out what he actually "did"
- jimmies 9y ago