4 ms·
Which kind of makes sense, because wealth is supposed to be a measure of one's contribution to society. You contributed more, you can get away with more.
by mamon 6y ago
Which kind of makes sense, because wealth is supposed to be a measure of one's contribution to society. You contributed more, you can get away with more.
- dane-pgp 6y ago> wealth is supposed to be a measure of one's contribution to society That principle is only relevant in societies that don't have lotteries or inheritance, among other changes.
- adamsea 6y ago> wealth is supposed to be a measure of one's contribution to society Curious where that idea comes from - source? Haven't encountered it. I know that many people _think_ that, or _feel_ that way, but I haven't read anything (philosophy, political philosophy, etc), that actually theorizes it _should_ be that way, or that it really _is_ that way. Tim Berners-Lee -- how much money does he have, and what is his contribution to society? Or, the classic kindergarten teacher vs NBA player, etc.