What does democracy have to do with allocating a scarce resource?

Allocating a scare resource so that some people can use it multiple times while others can never use it isn't exactly democratic.

Every society has some measure for who deserves more and who deserves less. The Nazis determined it by ethnicity. Other societies determined it by whether you were born into noble families. Our society today determines it by wealth, which in the end is just a proxy for ancestry and luck.

A truly fair system would allocate resources only based on factors entirely under your own control. It's not fair if you're punished for being born into the wrong family.

It follows that using wealth as a measure is definitely a bad choice.

I’m also still not clear why money is a bad tool for acquiring luxury resources. We’re not talking about necessary food and shelter, we’re talking about a high end restaurant.

Is there something wrong with saving money for things I want? Why should I have to enter a lottery for everything? Maybe I end up with a trip to Disney World, which I don’t want, instead of a nice date night with my wife, which I do want. Is there some reason you think that’s a more desirable situation or more fair?

It feels like a weird way to try to be equitable for things that will never, ever be equitable, and a strange, unsupportable justification for it.

Wealth amassed through working and saving your wage is a just and fair system in my opinion. It's still biased as not all wages are fairly negotiated, but it's the most fair solution today.

My vision for the world is a socially democratic one — everyone is guaranteed a basic level of survival, similar in terms of housing, medical care and food access to what you'd get from a university dorm and cafeteria.

Beyond that, people can gain wealth from their own work and save it up. If you'd rather eat at a cheap restaurant every week, or a michelin star restaurant every few years, should be up to you.

But your wealth and your access to resources should come from your own work and not the luck of being born into the right family, the right ethnicity, the right country, or the right caste.

It's not a choice. Would you rather it be wealth or violence? As civilizations mature, the power that happens to be encapsulated in a tribal (read gang) leader's threat of physical violence and banishment transmogrifies into debt obligations once a strong civil law foundation is in place.

>By what measure do you or I deserve more than poor people? Who decides who deserves what? Let me know and we'll start lobbying next Monday ;)

“Don't you understand that it's a question of power, and money means power. It's as simple as that.”

- John Deuss

>Why should a rich person be able to experience luxury more often than a poor person?

Because that is the benefit of being rich. Perhaps this question is better phrased as “Why should there be a wealth/income gap greater than <$x>?”

Why would you work harder to get rich if you don't get anything for it?

this comment wouldn't be nonsense if we lived in a political economy where money came exclusively from working hard / hazardous / difficult jobs, but in case you forgot, plenty of rich people have never worked a day in their lives and either lucked into an inheritance or sit on their ass and cash rent / dividend checks

Imagine a scenario where you could banish your children to a hellish, poverty-stricken existence -- but their peers would be even worse off than that. Alternatively, you could give your children a happy, comfortable life, but all of their peers would be equal to them.

Are you seriously suggesting that you would choose the first option, not the second one?

Obviously I want my own children to live the best possible life I can give them, but I want their peers to do well, too. It is crazy to me to care only about your children's status in their community, rather than their absolute wellbeing and the wellbeing of the community they are a part of.

Why does a rich person only has access to any asset you are selling. Could I get it for free?

"None of this is communist, but that is the nature of luxury".