> if everyone had access to this capability then society and civilization would grind to a halt No it wouldn't. The scenario is not an actual one. Passive inc

> if everyone had access to this capability then society and civilization would grind to a halt No it wouldn't. The scenario is not an actual one. Passive income comes from someone benefiting from something you own and paying for it. It must still be benefiting for them to pay for it. If things had ground to a halt, no one would be getting anything, so they wouldn't pay for it. It's like if I said that people running faster and faster would eventually result in them running faster than the speed of light. No it wouldn't: I'm just extrapolating a model out of its domain of applicability. > Or maybe only if you couple it with the categorical imperitive. It also requires taking 'collecting passive income' as a moral act. If I took 'being a car mechanic' as a moral act, I could explain how awful it would be if everyone became car mechanics: there would be no farmers or nurses. But that's a poor analysis of the morality of occupation. This application is absurd and your application is not, but there is a decision on your part that wasn't among your premises.