> You're assuming that economic outcome is the one metric by which all people should be equalized. This seems a bit presumptive doesn't it? I didn’t mention an

> You're assuming that economic outcome is the one metric by which all people should be equalized. This seems a bit presumptive doesn't it? I didn’t mention anything specifically about economic outcomes, although obviously money can have a big effect on important outcomes like nutrition and medical care. > No one said they are inferior, only that they seem produce different results. It's you who is characterizing these as inferior. Someone did say this. The comment I’m responding to used the terms “drastically worse outcomes” and “lesser people.” Also, I’m not here to quibble about questions like “is it really worse to be starving than to be well-fed?”