U tweetove putem weba ili aplikacija drugih proizvođača možete dodati podatke o lokaciji, kao što su grad ili točna lokacija. Povijest lokacija tweetova uvijek možete izbrisati. Saznajte više
1/ My defense of billionaires: becoming a billionaire is generally tied to creating MANY billions of value for others. The societal contributions of billionaries increase our quality of life MUCH more than their existence decreases our quality of life.https://twitter.com/eriktorenberg/status/1224162470945685504 …
2/ Would you rather have access to Amazon, Uber, Apple, FB, Google, Ikea, Walmart, Ford, etc. while the founders of those companies become very rich, or would you rather have neither the founders becoming wealthy nor those companies' products?
3/ Note that no one says, "once a salesperson sells $500k, that's more than enough, so we'll stop paying them commission." Or, "this team already won two Superbowls, so let's ban them from future championships." So why would capping incentives for value creation be a good idea?
4/ Finally, some billionaires are wonderful people and some are awful, just like some minimum wage workers are wonderful people and some are awful. The solution is not to punish billionaires, but instead to punish bad behaviors.pic.twitter.com/JyUYElNZNQ
That kind of depends on whether they’re using their billions for fuckery in the political realm. Pretty easy to cancel out any benefit you might have on society.
100% agree. But then why not punish people for fuckery (regardless of their wealth) instead of punishing people for their wealth (regardless of whether it's used for fuckery)?
That argument works if you replace “billionaire” with “rich”. That’s great. When these people were creating that value, they weren’t thinking: “I’m going to create that value because I can become a billionaire.” 10s or 100s of millions more than suffice.
1) who are any of us to decide what suffices *for someone else*? If you ask a homeless person, they might suggest $50k suffices. 2) I'd argue lots of billionaires are better at deploying their billions than the govt would be. 3) Most of this is illiquid assets & not cash.
I think it's clear that the companies started and run by billionaires create billions in value, it's unclear if the singular contributions of an individual (even the founder) do the same. There isn't any empirical way to test which is why this becomes a philosophical argument.
My defense of billionaires: imagined caricature of folks swimming in pools of cash and lighting cigars with 10000 bills. In practice, extremely hard working people with assets mostly in investments they hope make the world better, including their cos and philanthropy.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.
