Julian658 wrote:Would that be Henry Ford, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Tiger Woods, The Beatles, etc?
They all had advantages, but they all got rich primarily from privilege.
Would that be Donald Trump, Hillary and Bill Clinton, CEO of BC/BS, etc?
I don't know what BC/BS is, but Trump and the Clintons, although they have obvious advantages, have certainly got rich by privilege.
Do you realize you are forming a hypothesis based on a tiny minority of the population?
Wrong. Almost all of us benefit from one privilege or another, one way or another. But we are almost all net losers from the
system of privilege, which only favors the most privileged.
Most people are working from week to week to put food on the table.
Most households own their residences, which usually means some portion of land. Therefore they are privileged.
The people that twist the system in their favor are the so-called 0.01%.
That's just the ones who are best at it. Millions of Americans have obtained the bulk of their wealth through privileges, especially land titles.
We could get rid of them tomorrow and the hierarchy of talent among humans would be exactly the same.
But the hierarchy of wealth, income and condition would be very, very different.
I have no problem in taking the money away from the Clintons or 45 as they did no invent or create anything.
The Clintons seem to have been lawyers, so presumably they provided services of some sort. I don't know who 45 is.
Hopefully, you would allow the Henry Fords of the world to thrive.
Yes, and they would thrive even better if they didn't have to serve the privileged. FYI, Henry Ford himself was a Georgist.
Slavery was universal!
No, it was only widespread. In Europe, feudalism showed that as long as the good land was all privately owned, slavery was unnecessary: landowners could treat the landless like slaves without all the bother of actually owning them.
It has nothing to do with privilege, but with a group of people conquering another group during the not so distant barbaric era.
Garbage. It has everything to do with privilege: the legal entitlement to own other people's rights to liberty, the same privilege the landowner enjoys. The only difference is that the slave owner owns all of one person's rights to liberty, the landowner owns one of all people's rights to liberty.