[legitster]

> The guy's gumption led to the invention of a multi-billion dollar pear year industry, and he got basically none of it.

But... the billion dollar industry is also capitalism? This logic is circular and makes no sense. If there is no capitalism there is no compensation to be distributed in this case, period.

The argument that he was unfairly compensated based on merit is fundamentally a capitalist argument. You can't play it both ways.

[dymk]

Are you saying the outcome here is fair and desirable?

The first step to fixing a problem is admitting one exists. This seems clearly like a failure of capitalism to reward the innovation of a person who actually did the innovation.