[tkiley]

>... if we lived in such a world, would you still be upset that Mark Zuckerberg had a lot more money than you? Why?

That's a really good question. Theoretically, I would be fine with that kind of world, but I dont think that kind of world has ever existed or will ever exist. It is more realistic to attack the problem on both fronts - maximize social mobility and minimize the influence of wealth on politics, but also recognize that you will never completely succeed. Wealth will always equal opportunity and influence to some extent, so inequality will always be a bad thing to some extent.

For what it's worth, I'm not upset that Zuck has a lot more money than me. I just think that entrepreneurially generated inequality should not be a sacred cow, and I'm speaking as someone who has created a good deal of inequality with entrepreneurship.

[sail]

> Wealth will always equal opportunity and influence to some extent, so inequality will always be a bad thing to some extent.

Perhaps, but we may all be surprised to how little extent. Instead of giving up, it's worth giving a better world a try.