It doesn't take ten times the ink, to put another zero on the check.

[HowToBe]

I happened across this and found it a pretty interesting read. The author makes some interesting points that I haven't heard before. I get the impression that the conclusions he draws are "off" somehow (), but I haven't entirely traced it out, maybe because I'm tired, or maybe it's somewhat over my head. I don't know if it's appropriate to go on SOTT for this reason, and I'm curious if anyone here could help me understand what I'm looking at?

_http://news.quelsolaar.com/#post86

The value of money doesn't scale linearly with how much you have. You see, some dollars are worth more then others. Having more gives you more negotiation leverage, it gives you economy of scale and means that the things we all have to pay can be covered by a smaller part of your income. The plane ticket to go to a city to sign a million dollar deal, is not any less expensive then a plane ticket you needed to go sign a billion dollar deal. The natural state of any unregulated economy is to give the rich a slight advantage proportionally to the poor. Sure, any one can win or loose, but like in a casino, this slight advantage will over a long enough time scale make sure the house always wins. You could say that "fair" as in equal for all, isn't fair at all. A worker earning half as much as an other will have less then half the financial freedom since they both need to pay for the same number of meals each day.

 

[clerck de bonk]

I happened across this and found it a pretty interesting read. The author makes some interesting points that I haven't heard before. I get the impression that the conclusions he draws are "off" somehow (), but I haven't entirely traced it out, maybe because I'm tired, or maybe it's somewhat over my head. I don't know if it's appropriate to go on SOTT for this reason, and I'm curious if anyone here could help me understand what I'm looking at?

_http://news.quelsolaar.com/#post86

...You could say that "fair" as in equal for all, isn't fair at all. A worker earning half as much as an other will have less then half the financial freedom since they both need to pay for the same number of meals each day.

This is nothing new, this is the way it is. It so obvious that people usually don't think about what it really means...
What do You mean by "off" or rather, what are his other conclusions?

Edit: Skimmed through the original piece and it seems like "yet another intellectual that haven't got a clue what psycopathy is".
(IMO)Worth reading though.

 

[HowToBe]

What do You mean by "off" or rather, what are his other conclusions?

I guess it's mostly because he doesn't take psychopathy into account.

Some say we shouldn't punish success, but who says the future success will come form the rich? The future may not require the masses, but we will only find the few we need in the masses. Giving as many people as possible the chance to try and fail, is therefor paramount through education, encouragement and financial security for all.

The part I've put in bold bothers me somewhat. "The few we need" sounds like a twisted thought to me, but I don't know if I'm reading this correctly.

 

[clerck de bonk]

Some say we shouldn't punish success, but who says the future success will come form the rich? The future may not require the masses, but we will only find the few we need in the masses. Giving as many people as possible the chance to try and fail, is therefor paramount through education, encouragement and financial security for all.

The part I've put in bold bothers me somewhat. "The few we need" sounds like a twisted thought to me, but I don't know if I'm reading this correctly.

Well that would be "off" especially since he doesn't take pathology in to count.