3 ms·

So he hasn't given money to charity, yet. He has contributed a ridiculous amount to the world by way of Apple, NeXT, and Pixar. He has created tens of thousand

by Adrock 15y ago

So he hasn't given money to charity, yet. He has contributed a ridiculous amount to the world by way of Apple, NeXT, and Pixar. He has created tens of thousands of jobs and brought communicative and creative power to millions of people. Who knows what he's going to do with his money? He's dedicated his life to building things for other people, so what makes anyone think he won't do something that benefits others with his money?

lukesandberg 15y ago
I think the major point of the article was that jobs is getting something of a free pass amongst his billionaire peers. I think the last line sums it up pretty well: "[O]ur intuitions about economic desert and fair distribution are...complicated." Fair distribution is the real issue. There is a great quote from Warren Buffet on the matter: "My wealth has come from a combination of living in America, some lucky genes, and compound interest. Both my children and I won what I call the ovarian lottery. (For starters, the odds against my 1930 birth taking place in the U.S. were at least 30 to 1. My being male and white also removed huge obstacles that a majority of Americans then faced.) My luck was accentuated by my living in a market system that sometimes produces distorted results, though overall it serves our country well. I’ve worked in an economy that rewards someone who saves the lives of others on a battlefield with a medal, rewards a great teacher with thank-you notes from parents, but rewards those who can detect the mispricing of securities with sums reaching into the billions. In short, fate’s distribution of long straws is wildly capricious." (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett) Basically capitalism aims to drive capital (and thus wealth) towards those members of society who are the most productive. However capitalism has a very limited sense of productivity and thus it may discount some things that matter a lot in human society. So distortions will exist and one could reasonably assume that any one at steve jobs or warren buffets level is the lucky recipient of riding some kind of capitalistic distortion to the top. It's is up to society and culture to decide what is ultimately fair and as the OP said it's complicated...
- Adrock 15y ago
  Peers? He ends by comparing Jobs to oil executives. Oil companies are ridiculously subsidized by the US government in many ways, the most egregious being the use of the military to secure major pipelines at the cost of trillions of dollars and many lives. Those subsidies end up not-so-indirectly as the compensation for said executives. Apple is a company that takes raw materials and ideas and manufactures some of the most desirable products in the world. If everyone wants to give him their money of their own free will, what's the problem? Oil companies don't give you a choice. Even before purchasing a single drop of gas, each American has literally given them tens of thousands of dollars by way of taxes and the deficit. They are vilified for a reason. Just because they have similar orders of magnitude of money doesn't mean that the same moral judgements need to be made of them. The whole article is a disingenuous troll piece. Another example is the initial appeal to the universal hatred of software patents. Yes, IP laws are horrible when it comes to software, but it is ridiculous to claim that Apple's riches are dependent on them. The author is grasping to associate Jobs with the standard "evils."
  - lukesandberg 15y ago
    He also compares jobs to people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett. The oil executives were being used as a polar example of the kinds of opinions that people can have about the very wealthy. I don't believe the author was trolling. He was pointing out simply the variety of opinions that people often have about the very wealthy and the fact that Jobs seems to rise above it. The main point is not about good/evil, it's about fairness. You may think that it's fair that Jobs is so wealthy because he deserves it for all his hard work (and im not saying that he hasn't worked very hard and done a very good job at that). But the question is if it's fair. Warren Buffett admitted that he didn't think it was particularly fair that he is as wealthy as he is, or (more recently) that he pays as little in taxes as he does.

by Adrock 15y ago

lukesandberg 15y ago

I think the major point of the article was that jobs is getting something of a free pass amongst his billionaire peers. I think the last line sums it up pretty well: "[O]ur intuitions about economic desert and fair distribution are...complicated." Fair distribution is the real issue. There is a great quote from Warren Buffet on the matter: "My wealth has come from a combination of living in America, some lucky genes, and compound interest. Both my children and I won what I call the ovarian lottery. (For starters, the odds against my 1930 birth taking place in the U.S. were at least 30 to 1. My being male and white also removed huge obstacles that a majority of Americans then faced.) My luck was accentuated by my living in a market system that sometimes produces distorted results, though overall it serves our country well. I’ve worked in an economy that rewards someone who saves the lives of others on a battlefield with a medal, rewards a great teacher with thank-you notes from parents, but rewards those who can detect the mispricing of securities with sums reaching into the billions. In short, fate’s distribution of long straws is wildly capricious." (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett) Basically capitalism aims to drive capital (and thus wealth) towards those members of society who are the most productive. However capitalism has a very limited sense of productivity and thus it may discount some things that matter a lot in human society. So distortions will exist and one could reasonably assume that any one at steve jobs or warren buffets level is the lucky recipient of riding some kind of capitalistic distortion to the top. It's is up to society and culture to decide what is ultimately fair and as the OP said it's complicated...

Adrock 15y ago
Peers? He ends by comparing Jobs to oil executives. Oil companies are ridiculously subsidized by the US government in many ways, the most egregious being the use of the military to secure major pipelines at the cost of trillions of dollars and many lives. Those subsidies end up not-so-indirectly as the compensation for said executives. Apple is a company that takes raw materials and ideas and manufactures some of the most desirable products in the world. If everyone wants to give him their money of their own free will, what's the problem? Oil companies don't give you a choice. Even before purchasing a single drop of gas, each American has literally given them tens of thousands of dollars by way of taxes and the deficit. They are vilified for a reason. Just because they have similar orders of magnitude of money doesn't mean that the same moral judgements need to be made of them. The whole article is a disingenuous troll piece. Another example is the initial appeal to the universal hatred of software patents. Yes, IP laws are horrible when it comes to software, but it is ridiculous to claim that Apple's riches are dependent on them. The author is grasping to associate Jobs with the standard "evils."
- lukesandberg 15y ago
  He also compares jobs to people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett. The oil executives were being used as a polar example of the kinds of opinions that people can have about the very wealthy. I don't believe the author was trolling. He was pointing out simply the variety of opinions that people often have about the very wealthy and the fact that Jobs seems to rise above it. The main point is not about good/evil, it's about fairness. You may think that it's fair that Jobs is so wealthy because he deserves it for all his hard work (and im not saying that he hasn't worked very hard and done a very good job at that). But the question is if it's fair. Warren Buffett admitted that he didn't think it was particularly fair that he is as wealthy as he is, or (more recently) that he pays as little in taxes as he does.