Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Most of the issue seems to comes down to "fairness". The natural world is not fair, but it is a working system. A elephant does not work harder than a an ant to survive, in fact you might say the opposite is true. The elephant won the ovarian lottery, this is not fair to the ant, but the system works.

I think it would be ridiculous to suggest that those 85 people worked 41 million times harder to get where they are compared to the other 3.5 billion, that's simply impossible. The successful seem to have a hard time grasping or accepting the amount of opportunity (luck) involved in their success.

I personally think its better to look at the economy as a game and the game must have arbitrary rules defined to "level the playing field". These rules must followed and enforced to maximize the enjoyment of the games participants. After all thats what a modern economy does, improve quality of life, not just survival. The rules will need to be modified and tuned over time to find the sweet spot. As with all games there will be super-stars and weak players that get compensated differently, however the ruleset will limit inequality to something "fair" and "enjoyable" to all participants.

One quote that always comes to mind: "The free market should be a prize fight not a barroom brawl".



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: