Thats fair enough but, for me, the problem is that one of the many things that are highly valuable is a CEO thats very good at paying everyone below them as little as possible, to maximise wealth extraction by shareholders. Valuable to who?

Of course, youd be right to say that how business works but I think its unfair to use the paygap they’re incentivised to make as justification of the paygap its self. By far and away, most of the people in the world work for their money.

Personally, I have mixed feelings about this. I don’t really care if someone who works harder than me and or was more successful having a bigger house and a faster car etc. I don’t think those things matter as much to me and the incentive can, potentially, be put to really wholesome uses. To me, the only question is “how much more?”

The problem is the people who don’t work for their money and just own for it instead. Not that you’ve said either way but they dont necessarily and very often don’t work harder, have more experience or more responsibilities. Once you’re wealthy enough, you can have nearly all of that taken care or for you.

Personally, I agree with it in the sense of at least the CEOs are working and there are bigger problems.

100% and you probably know this, so I’m just addin: think of infinity as a sequence of infinite numbers. The number of all the even numbers, that stretch off into infinity, are also infinite. However, that infinite number isn’t as big as regular infinity.

You can have different sizes of infinity because when things get that big, the rules change. Its almost like infinity / 2 = smaller infinity.

Tbf, those same billionaires are pretty powerful but yeah, you’re right and it’s tragic.

Its also exactly the kind of thing you’d expect to read about in the onion.

This is beyond mear irony.

Imo, you’ve got all the prices. However, I would put them in a different order.

Short answer: Republican or Democrat, the candidate that spends the most wins. Therefore, fund raising is winning.

There’s a small group of king-makers in the US and the candidate who offers them the most becomes president. Recently, the people who decide who gets to be president has started to include social media companies and amazon, who hosts half the Internet. Trump also cozied up to the American owner of the company the owns tiktok. Thats how he won. Trumps also great for social media engagement and news channel views.

Even candidates who happen to be better than the republican candidate, no democratic hopeful worth being of “the left” will ever be given enough money to become the president of America. Even if they started from a position that would appeal to them, they would have to compromise on everything that made them that in order to be allowed anywhere near the Whitehouse by the American ultra wealthy.

What you’re seeing isn’t the failure of the Democrats to correctly triangulate but the strength of the American ultra wealthy consent manufacturing machine.