3 ms·
Boiling wealth down to solely luck or family is a wild leap, and I’m not sure how you’d support it with actual evidence. Counter examples are trivial. I’m also
by jmye 3y ago
Boiling wealth down to solely luck or family is a wild leap, and I’m not sure how you’d support it with actual evidence. Counter examples are trivial.
I’m also still not clear why money is a bad tool for acquiring luxury resources. We’re not talking about necessary food and shelter, we’re talking about a high end restaurant.
Is there something wrong with saving money for things I want? Why should I have to enter a lottery for everything? Maybe I end up with a trip to Disney World, which I don’t want, instead of a nice date night with my wife, which I do want. Is there some reason you think that’s a more desirable situation or more fair?
It feels like a weird way to try to be equitable for things that will never, ever be equitable, and a strange, unsupportable justification for it.
- kuschku 3y agoYou may have misunderstood me — I didn't say luck or family is the only source of wealth. But in a just world, luck or family should have as little influence on your allocation of resources as possible. Wealth amassed through working and saving your wage is a just and fair system in my opinion. It's still biased as not all wages are fairly negotiated, but it's the most fair solution today. My vision for the world is a socially democratic one — everyone is guaranteed a basic level of survival, similar in terms of housing, medical care and food access to what you'd get from a university dorm and cafeteria. Beyond that, people can gain wealth from their own work and save it up. If you'd rather eat at a cheap restaurant every week, or a michelin star restaurant every few years, should be up to you. But your wealth and your access to resources should come from your own work and not the luck of being born into the right family, the right ethnicity, the right country, or the right caste.