2 ms·
> Abilities of individuals varies wildly, which translates into productivity Even if I accept your premise, it doesn’t explain why some places have far more we
by janalsncm 1y ago
> Abilities of individuals varies wildly, which translates into productivity
Even if I accept your premise, it doesn’t explain why some places have far more wealth inequality than others despite having similar differences in abilities in those places. There might be some innate differences in abilities, but the magnification of those differences is socially constructed. It’s not a fact of nature.
You also are discounting luck. Some people are lucky. They were born with enormous inherited wealth. Or, their business happened to be in the right place in the right time.
- nh23423fefe 1y agoso what, what's wrong with luck? you are pretending that inherited wealth came from nowhere. someone did it and they love their family more than randoms. so of course their family benefits. why should i work hard for strangers who vilify me?
- janalsncm 1y agoIt’s at odds with meritocracy. We should reward competence and hard work, not membership in a dynasty.
- nh23423fefe 1y agoYou seem to think that rich people don't win because they are better. Seems like cope to me to imagine they are outside of merit systems. Family relationships are just compound interest.
- gruez 1y agoDo you have kids? If so, are you going to send him/her to a private school, assuming you can afford it? What about stumping up money for extracurriculars or tutoring? Or if you're not really wealthy, what about giving immaterial aid like tutoring yourself? All of these things are "at odds with meritocracy", but that doesn't mean it's a slam dunk argument against them.