I'm saying it doesn't matter if Tim Cook has a cause, because he's probably not very good at helping that cause.
Which is a direct response to your original point which was an absurd hypothetical about how Tim Cook should be allowed to make as much money as he wants, cause what if he maybe ends up doing some good for society. I agree with the original point that people don't really need much more than a living wage...
I'm saying that it's absurd to pray for Billionaires to do good for the rest of us, when we could just tax them, and make them do it. That's where the gov't comes in.
> Which is a direct response to your original point which was an absurd hypothetical about how Tim Cook should be allowed to make as much money as he wants
Dude you’re so deep in your own mind hole. Read the post again to see that no such point was ever raised.
OP “I can’t see why anyone would do this” and I tried to help add a perspective so that they might be able to get a little bit more from the world, as if lending a magnifying glass. It was a question and answer about human motivation, not govt policy.
At no point do I assert that someone -should- do something or that some position is morally justified over others.
You might consider that you get into ~200% more arguments than you actually should and your combativeness turns would-be allies into enemies.
You don't say that he 'should' do anything. But you're providing a purely hypothetical example of what someone might do with their money if they were allowed to continue making money beyond the amount of money that they would need to buy a nice house and feed themselves well.
You're providing a justification for why someone would need more money. Why would you do that, if you don't believe that they should be able to do that? This is such an obnoxious level of not sticking to a reasonable interpretation of what you said.
I know you didn't say the word 'should', but if you don't see that you providing a defense (in the form of a case for why they should need more money than what the original commenter stated) of billionaires reads as you cosigning why they should be allowed to make billions, then maybe, legitimately, you should take an English literature class? Like, this reads as pretty Gas-Lighting behavior to me. I'm not responding to things you didn't write.
Which is a direct response to your original point which was an absurd hypothetical about how Tim Cook should be allowed to make as much money as he wants, cause what if he maybe ends up doing some good for society. I agree with the original point that people don't really need much more than a living wage...
I'm saying that it's absurd to pray for Billionaires to do good for the rest of us, when we could just tax them, and make them do it. That's where the gov't comes in.