devogue wrote:

cavarka9 wrote:

UtilityMonster wrote:

Have any statistics to back that up? I am genuinely interested to know if that is the case.

I think a more accurate explanation takes into account that, rather than simply inheriting millions or billions of dollars, the children of the wealthy have better access to education, nutrition, genes and a more nurturing and loving home, and are thus more likely to prosper in their professions as a result. This doesn't particularly bother me, as I think that people who work to earn money should be allowed to spend most of it as they please, and if that means spending it on their childrens' welfare, then so be it. Do you disagree?

And if one believes in utilitarianism, then surely the issue should be maximum good for maximum people, in which case, it might be better off to kill such people and re distribute their wealth.

Could we begin with Simon Cowell?

Tyrannical wrote:If I recall, much of great art had been commissioned by the wealthy. Bankers in particular.

CookieJon wrote:Is it wrong for beautiful people not to become models or porn stars?