2 ms·

It is classic circular reasoning. Why should they have all money? Well because they are the best ones at allocating the resources. How do we know they are best

It is classic circular reasoning. Why should they have all money? Well because they are the best ones at allocating the resources. How do we know they are best at allocating resources? Because they have all the money.

detreatsie 1y ago
This reminds me of the old dusty adage: "To him that hath, more shall be given and to him that hath not, more shall be taken away" I suppose it was more popular in seemingly simpler times when the playing field was more even and the players more evenly matched and distributed. But here we are in the future, and that game seems to have been concluded. I myself rather preferred the view from the shoulders of giants than the undersides of their feet.
- Gravityloss 1y ago
  There is a agent simulation paradigm where a large amount ofagents engage in one-on-one transactions and wealth is transferred. I haven't followed but decades ago there was a simulation where with rather simpler rules, in the end all the wealth concentrated to one agent. In this model, it's the rules of the game, not the morality of the players that causes the effects.
vmg12 1y ago
This is a lazy strawman.
- DangitBobby 1y ago
  It's an accurate summary.
  - vmg12 1y ago
    It's accurate? So all the current billionaires are descendants of other billionaires?
    - DangitBobby 1y ago
      It seems you're implying that since being a billionaire is not 100% heritable, it must be a result of individual merit (leap 1) which is purely synonymous with skillfully allocating resources (leap 2) more than any other type of person (leap 3) rather than any other explanation for how they got there, say, sociopathy, right place right time, etc.
      - vmg12 1y ago
        > It seems you're implying that since being a billionaire is not 100% heritable, it must be a result of individual merit Nope, another strawman, I never claimed it was 100% merit. You claimed that wealth is purely heritable which is easily proven false by observing reality. > sociopathy So your claim is that sociopathy is more important for getting rich than skill? > right place right time Choosing the right business to build given the state of the world is a skill. Business requires luck the same way poker requires luck, and let me tell you, if you play poker vs a skilled player you will lose a lot of money.

detreatsie 1y ago

This reminds me of the old dusty adage: "To him that hath, more shall be given and to him that hath not, more shall be taken away" I suppose it was more popular in seemingly simpler times when the playing field was more even and the players more evenly matched and distributed. But here we are in the future, and that game seems to have been concluded. I myself rather preferred the view from the shoulders of giants than the undersides of their feet.

Gravityloss 1y ago
There is a agent simulation paradigm where a large amount ofagents engage in one-on-one transactions and wealth is transferred. I haven't followed but decades ago there was a simulation where with rather simpler rules, in the end all the wealth concentrated to one agent. In this model, it's the rules of the game, not the morality of the players that causes the effects.

vmg12 1y ago

This is a lazy strawman.

DangitBobby 1y ago
It's an accurate summary.
- vmg12 1y ago
  It's accurate? So all the current billionaires are descendants of other billionaires?
  - DangitBobby 1y ago
    It seems you're implying that since being a billionaire is not 100% heritable, it must be a result of individual merit (leap 1) which is purely synonymous with skillfully allocating resources (leap 2) more than any other type of person (leap 3) rather than any other explanation for how they got there, say, sociopathy, right place right time, etc.
    - vmg12 1y ago
      > It seems you're implying that since being a billionaire is not 100% heritable, it must be a result of individual merit Nope, another strawman, I never claimed it was 100% merit. You claimed that wealth is purely heritable which is easily proven false by observing reality. > sociopathy So your claim is that sociopathy is more important for getting rich than skill? > right place right time Choosing the right business to build given the state of the world is a skill. Business requires luck the same way poker requires luck, and let me tell you, if you play poker vs a skilled player you will lose a lot of money.