3 ms·

> do you really think so little of boat-builders that you don't think they'd turn their hand to something else than building yatchs, that would be good and prof

> do you really think so little of boat-builders that you don't think they'd turn their hand to something else than building yatchs, that would be good and profitable for all involved do you think so little of boat-builders that you want to tell them what they should do with their lives? I imagine if they're building boats it's because they like building boats, and are more than happy that there are obscenely rich people there to pay them a livelihood designing and building beautiful yachts.

burnished 5y ago
I think you're missing the point. They'd still keep building boats right? Except they wouldn't exclusively serve the ultra wealthy. Because the market wouldn't exist. Because people shouldn't be insanely wealthy. Because that comes at a cost to other people and is entirely a function of social systems, systems that we should make benefit everyone and not just a select few.
- robertlagrant 5y ago
  So if they're still building boats (presumably for no one?) Then they won't be the nurses etc earlier in the thread that this line of reasoning was countering.
  - burnished 5y ago
    It seems like you're struggling to imagine what people would even do with their lives if the industries that cropped up to service the ultra wealthy dissapeared. I am here to reveal to you, they would just work for other people performing needed services or producing goods. Simply put, there would be more for everyone else if the ultra wealthy did not exist to suck up so many resources.
    - robertlagrant 5y ago
      Not at all - you've badly misread what I said. You and one other person in this thread are saying: - the super rich shouldn't be around because they employ people to do the wrong jobs; those people should do other jobs, and removing the super rich is how we achieve this important aim - the super rich aren't required to keep those people employed; the same demand will magically appear if we remove the super rich You are particularly distinguished because you say both at different points, which is funny. But I am commenting at one time or another on either of those points above.

burnished 5y ago

I think you're missing the point. They'd still keep building boats right? Except they wouldn't exclusively serve the ultra wealthy. Because the market wouldn't exist. Because people shouldn't be insanely wealthy. Because that comes at a cost to other people and is entirely a function of social systems, systems that we should make benefit everyone and not just a select few.

robertlagrant 5y ago
So if they're still building boats (presumably for no one?) Then they won't be the nurses etc earlier in the thread that this line of reasoning was countering.
- burnished 5y ago
  It seems like you're struggling to imagine what people would even do with their lives if the industries that cropped up to service the ultra wealthy dissapeared. I am here to reveal to you, they would just work for other people performing needed services or producing goods. Simply put, there would be more for everyone else if the ultra wealthy did not exist to suck up so many resources.
  - robertlagrant 5y ago
    Not at all - you've badly misread what I said. You and one other person in this thread are saying: - the super rich shouldn't be around because they employ people to do the wrong jobs; those people should do other jobs, and removing the super rich is how we achieve this important aim - the super rich aren't required to keep those people employed; the same demand will magically appear if we remove the super rich You are particularly distinguished because you say both at different points, which is funny. But I am commenting at one time or another on either of those points above.