"The article is shit." ..is it? I find it hard to believe that you think the quotes admirable. That leaves "liar, liar pants on fire" as an argument. Furtherm

"The article is shit." ..is it? I find it hard to believe that you think the quotes admirable. That leaves "liar, liar pants on fire" as an argument. Furthermore, the assertion that "[rich people have] easily 10 times less [free time] than a teacher" as some sort of justification for making 10 times more than a teacher is patently absurd; people in all walks of life end up with little or no free time, bankers cause they work long hours, the less well paid because they need to commute from where they can afford to live. By your assumption these people should be paid in the millions, no: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/04/16/070416fa_fact_paumgarten http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/04/16/070416fa_fact_... I can only assume that you consider that you'll be among the rich and ignorant soon, and that when you do, you'd rather keep the cash yourself than share it. Of course, if you live in the US, the chances of you actually becoming rich if you weren't born into money is the lowest in the western world (check social mobility figures)