2 ms·
Then you have either negotiated your share in value creation poorly or your skills are easily sourced. Irrespective of that you are assuming happiness is just
by looping__lui 4y ago
Then you have either negotiated your share in value creation poorly or your skills are easily sourced.
Irrespective of that you are assuming happiness is just associated to absolute monetary wealth - which I disagree with. If basic resources and needs are catered for and the rest is spent on luxury goods or extravagant lifestyles - how would I care? If you want to still play that game, just travel and ask yourself what a person living in India/Bangladesh/Laos would say about your first world problems. Being born into a wealthy society is the most important differentiator for wealth - and I assume you are totally ok with the luck you had there!?
- harimau777 4y agoVanishingly few people are arguing for complete equality of outcome. As long as everyone[1] has a reasonable quality of life and inequality isn't so great that the wealthy can flout the rules that apply to everyone else, then I don't think that most people, even on the left, would have a problem. However, that's not what America currently has. [1] I'm using "everyone" metaphorically here. No system is going to have literally no one who falls through the cracks.