4 ms·

I would agree that wealth shouldn't negate his accomplishments. I think a lot of people who point out Gates' family wealth are reacting to the current politica

I would agree that wealth shouldn't negate his accomplishments. I think a lot of people who point out Gates' family wealth are reacting to the current political/ideological climate which would say "look, Bill Gates is self-made, so anyone can be!" neglecting the ridiculous enabling impact that enormous family wealth has, and shaming poor people for not being able to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.

pathseeker 8y ago
>are reacting to the current political/ideological climate Which climate are you referring to? The current climate in the US on the left is being dominated by the narrative that rich people are only successful because of their environment so they don't have the claim to their money that they think they do. "Every billionaire is a policy failure" https://www.mediaite.com/uncategorized/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-policy-guy-every-billionaire-is-a-policy-failure/ https://www.mediaite.com/uncategorized/alexandria-ocasio-cor... This view is not a reaction to balance anything out, it's a policy position that billionaires should not exist because they do not deserve that much money.
- majormajor 8y ago
  I don't see talk of deserving things in your link, or of reasons for success. Someone could be both completely "deserving" of having received the income and "guilty" of "hoarding" it at the same time. "The acquisition of that much wealth has bad consequences. A moral society needs guardrails against it." "Moral society" isn't explored in that article, but "has bad consequences" is pretty far away from "isn't deserved." You can make a lot of policy-based arguments against extreme concentration - whether in a monopolistic company, a huge government, or in a billionaire - is a bad thing, overall, from various angles. And lots of people are making those different arguments. The "people are just lucky" argument is one, but I'm not seeing that one dominate my magazine and newspaper RSS feeds at the expense of any others.

pathseeker 8y ago

>are reacting to the current political/ideological climate Which climate are you referring to? The current climate in the US on the left is being dominated by the narrative that rich people are only successful because of their environment so they don't have the claim to their money that they think they do. "Every billionaire is a policy failure" https://www.mediaite.com/uncategorized/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-policy-guy-every-billionaire-is-a-policy-failure/ https://www.mediaite.com/uncategorized/alexandria-ocasio-cor... This view is not a reaction to balance anything out, it's a policy position that billionaires should not exist because they do not deserve that much money.

majormajor 8y ago
I don't see talk of deserving things in your link, or of reasons for success. Someone could be both completely "deserving" of having received the income and "guilty" of "hoarding" it at the same time. "The acquisition of that much wealth has bad consequences. A moral society needs guardrails against it." "Moral society" isn't explored in that article, but "has bad consequences" is pretty far away from "isn't deserved." You can make a lot of policy-based arguments against extreme concentration - whether in a monopolistic company, a huge government, or in a billionaire - is a bad thing, overall, from various angles. And lots of people are making those different arguments. The "people are just lucky" argument is one, but I'm not seeing that one dominate my magazine and newspaper RSS feeds at the expense of any others.