The Haves and The Have-Yachts...

I found it a very entertaining, and well written story.

I'm in agreement with your take on capitalism versus socialism. However, I don't think that the capitalism rewards the smart and unscrupulous; I think capitalism rewards the lucky and unscrupulous.

I can't think of any super-rich person that I would say earned their money because of superior brain power. They were just at the right place at the right time as opposed to their equals who were not. That's the unfairness of capitalism.

>>>I can't think of any super-rich person that I would say earned their money because of superior brain power. They were just at the right place at the right time as opposed to their equals who were not. That's the unfairness of capitalism.<<<

FWIW, my thoughts exactly. Bill Gates getting a contract for a word processor from IBM, Zuckerberg playing around with some silly program in college, Bezos selling books on line, etc. Of course they grabbed the bull by the horns and took off. But the start was more luck than anything else.

I believe that luck alone gave Gates the chance to capitalize on his abilities, abilities which many others had at the time. They just didn't have the luck, or opportunity if you will.

Just because you downplay "the luck component" doesn't make those who believe in its importance jealous of the wealthy. Denigrating others is a lame way of debating. You're showing traits of an American politician.

Guys, I was there when IBM and the company I worked for (DEC) finally recognized an intelligent work station was the future to unload main-frams from multi user inter-rups and performance loss.
Digital Research (CPM) and this pimple faced kid (DOS) were the work station leads.
The end results was how a processors memory was used. Extended or expanded.
Gates extended memory proved later to be the path.
Arguments still continue 40 + years later.
I, at the time believed in expanded memory.

I am way past this post but I believe at the time. Luck was a distant thought, thinking out side of that then small box, research, lots of work and timing was a key for Bill Gates (& company?).
Gates has turned into a strange (different) identity of late but his hard work does need to be recognized as hard work and cutting edge at the time.
I would luv to raspberry him now days but have to recognize his work back then.

His capitalist moves since then have expanded well.
,rc

Because it is a denigration and you know it; your "guilty conscience" question proves you know.

No, I meant exactly what I said. I used the singular "an American politician" because you are just one person, i.e., singular. It's a grammar thing.

What I was referring to about an American politician that you take as a compliment is their tendency to try to discredit an opponent in a debate when their own argument is weak. Denigration is a favorite tool.

You've accused me of having jealousy (you should have used "envy," but maybe your translation software is limited) that affects my ability to focus, of having a guilty conscience that proves that I'm jealous (envious), and that I meant "all American politicians" when I didn't. If you want to be good at discrediting someone, you'll have to use something that you can prove. Otherwise, it's just a distraction.

I maintain that luck is much more important when trying to achieve wealth than smartness is. There's just not enough difference in the intelligence of everyone on earth to explain the haves and the have-yachts.