> No, it simplifies to "everybody can retire, period". Sure, I'd love that too. It's a great goal but not one that I remotely believe is actually achievable. F

> No, it simplifies to "everybody can retire, period". Sure, I'd love that too. It's a great goal but not one that I remotely believe is actually achievable. Feel free to come back within the next 50 years and say you told me so if I end up being wrong. > When someone refers to "wealth inequality", they're not talking about disparities of 1 or two orders of magnitude, they're talking about 5 or 6 orders of magnitude. This is an unfounded claim. I'd love to see what data you're basing this on. > Show me a disparity in beauty or health of 6 orders of magnitude. I can also easily show you disparities of that magnitude: just look at any of the many chronically ill patients that rack up medical expenses throughout their life, versus people who smoke and drink into their 80s and 90s without a problem and never see a doctor. You can easily use total lifetime medical cost as a metric if you want to meet your arbitrary disparity threshold. If you're in the "everyone's beautiful/healthy/smart in their own way" crowd then we have fundamentally different stances and there's little use talking further.