[yakshaving_jgt]

You have changed your argument.

First you challenged the idea that everyone who earns money contributes to society.

Then you changed your argument to challenge the idea that everyone who earns money is a net positive to society.

Those two things are not the same, and moving the goalposts in this way is intellectually dishonest.

A lobbyist contributes to society insofar as that they spend their money in their local community on food and shelter, and in most cases also pay taxes. Whether or not every earner is a net positive to society was not my argument.

[loa_in_]

It's really really uncommon to use "contribute to society" in any sense other than "contribute positively/constructively to society". It's clearly a misunderstanding here.

[yakshaving_jgt]

That may be so, but even people who are a net negative to society (which is fairly subjective anyway) make positive contributions.

The world isn't quite so black and white, you know?

[mstipetic]

How is contributing and net positive not equivalent?

[yakshaving_jgt]

Because a net result is the total after summing positive and negative contributions.