I mostly ignore the billionaire demonization debate but an argument that they shouldn’t exist because their riches are primarily due to luck caught my eye Is there a coherent moral argument that society should confiscate the fruits of risky gambles?
-
So we agree then that financial rewards are only a part of what drives risk takers. Would you agree that contemporary American policy places too much value on that one aspect, and has enabled financial gamblers to capture gains by posing as entrepreneurs? Virus and host..
That America cares more about money than scholarship? Sure. But nearly all states have.
-
-
It’s not primarily about the money. It’s the image and prestige that comes with money.
-
My argument would be that larger financial rewards *ought to* eliminate the worst business practices, but currently don't. Cole slaw & sauerkraut should've gone the way of carbon paper, but shit wages still make them viable.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.