Politicians call Bezos greedy for having $x billion. But he didn't do this by taking more Amazon shares. He did it by growing revenues and thus the share price. So if he'd opted not to build AWS, that would have been the more moral choice, because then he'd have been less greedy?
-
-
You're right Paul but what about this article. (I really love you to answer, thanks).https://www.wsj.com/articles/amazon-tech-startup-echo-bezos-alexa-investment-fund-11595520249#comments_sector …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
They do it all the time. Merely having wealth is considered immoral to some.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The alternative is that wealth didn't exist at all. It's a shame people who don't read history are keen to assert power over others.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
"One of the sad signs of our times is that we have demonized those who produce, subsidized those who refuse to produce, and canonized those who complain." — Dr
@ThomasSowell, Vision of the Anointed -
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Conflating crony-capitalists with inventor-capitalists is the original sin of the democratic left.
-
This is good
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
To be fair, there is a difference between calling individuals greedy and attributing the state of wealth inequity in our society to greed. I don’t think it is clearly unambiguous to what Senator Sanders is referring.
-
Yeah, if a whole street is starving and there's one house with 1,000 years worth of food, that person may have gotten that food in legitimate ways, but they're still greedy for sitting on it while people starve around them. That's how I took Sanders' message.
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.