News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Limitarianism: The Case Against Extreme Wealth: Ingrid Robeyns. Parent comment

Re:Limitarianism: The Case Against Extreme Wealth: Ingrid Ro... by throwawaymaths on Saturday February 03, 2024 @02:35AM (#39238247)
That's terrible. Suppose you want to go some amount of social good that will cost you $15M. Let's say. Develop a new drug. Maybe you want to do something crazy, like don't patent it. It's clearly great for society. But nobody will give you money to do that. Your only recourse to do it is to amass wealth yourself and fund it personally.

Now you have a created a society where that sort of social entrepreneurism is impossible.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Limitarianism: The Case Against Extreme Wealth: Ingrid Ro... by bagful on Saturday February 03, 2024 @10:10AM (#39240996)
If this good were “clearly” great for society, they wouldn’t have trouble forming a conglomerate towards achieving it. We can use the wealth that isn’t sponged up and locked away at the bottom of the sea for such initiatives.

Society has had enough of ostensibly singular “great persons” inflicting their idea of the greater good on the rest of us in exchange for love, respect, and money. The rest of us have to earn those three.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Limitarianism: The Case Against Extreme Wealth: Ingrid Ro... by throwawaymaths on Saturday February 03, 2024 @12:00PM (#39242212)
> they wouldn’t have trouble forming a conglomerate towards achieving it.

That's underpants-gnomes level bullshit and you know it. Especially since I've given a concrete example that doesn't exist and would be AWESOME for society

[ Parent | on HN ]