[pbhjpbhj]

I suppose you believe all these billionaires are self-made and that having a handout of hundreds of thousands of dollars, and a network of very rich people you know to make investments, made no difference. 'Anyone can succeed through hard work'.

The really rich CEOs collect imaginary karma points on X ...

[ThrowawayR2]

I started my career alongside a variety of people who are now CEOs, VPs, distinguished engineers, CTOs, etc. and had a chance to observe them as they rose far, far above me. Luck played a factor in their rise, sure, but so did talent and an immense level of drive; their titles are ones they earned.

[ryandrake]

A lot of bad in our society can be explained by the fact that a lot of people seriously believe that some people are inherently better than others, and deserve to be at the top of the hierarchy, to follow different rules, to get more than one vote, that they are "elite" and should therefore get better treatment. Egalitarianism is not a universally held doctrine.

I thought the downvotes were coming from people who didn't get my sarcasm, but it could also be that HN readers really believe that CEOs are inherently better people...

[blackhawkC17]

People aren't inherently better than others, but people are infinitely better at some things than others.

Terrence Tao is inherently better at mathematics than I am, and I'd be a fool to claim otherwise. Torvalds is a much better programmer than I am. There are endless examples.

[ryandrake]

I'm not saying people aren't better at things than others. The thread was about whether these people deserved special treatment or a different set of rules because of this.

[bombcar]

Exactly.

Now if we start arguing if Torvalds "deserves" to be richer than Gates (even though both are quite better than adequate programmers from their time) that's a different story.

But in the end most of it really sounds like sour grapes and complaining.

[ThrowawayR2]

Egalitarianism is about equal social treatment and rights, not equal ability.