[alpha_squared]

If I may fix a major assumption, I'd like to acknowledge it:

> If it was because they [enslaved or underpaid people who] planted the crops, tended the fields, and did all the work to harvest and prepare it, I don't think any reasonable person would complain. We feel like that is a fair outcome because most nations have collectively agreed that owning property is a fundamental human right. In the US it's the 5th amendment.

All of a sudden it doesn't sound so reasonable and yet comes off a fair bit truer than the original.

[rsweeney21]

That's a different scenario than the one I presented. Sure, people would be upset if the four people got their dinner by using slaves. Hence my point that the "why" really matters.

[alpha_squared]

Historically, and currently, slave labor is used.

However, I believe I've stated more than just slave labor. It's a very relative thing, but it appears many people are certainly underpaid compared to the wealth they generate for the few. It's starting to feel like people in tech believe otherwise because they're compensated better than average and therefore might be "above it all". I think that's alarming and short-sighted.