We don't need a precise answer. It's already utterly obvious that billionaires are well beyond it. In fact, hemming and hawing about not having a precise answer strikes me as little more than making excuses for the obvious injustice that billionaire wealth entails.

the fact that we have "serious" convos about whether billionaires are okay suggests public consciousness that is totally divorced from the 1) actual scale of private wealth accumulation 2) its political implications. helpful data visualization:

eattherichtextformat.github.io/1-pixel-weal...

I mean, they already dismiss the concerns of fat people for not working out or eating right or whatever. So that's hardly a big change. Maybe we can find some way to make doctors not dismiss the concerns of fat people?

This has the same energy as "I'm not racist, but"

If one company has enough power to do this, that company is too large. Antitrust action is clearly necessary here.

Seems to me that we just need to abandon the assumption of continuity. Human behavior didn't really follow it all that well anyway, did it?

“In theory, the I.R.S. could audit the Trump transition…”

It’s pathetic that we’re at the point where we acknowledge we could uphold the law “in theory” and we all know it’s just a joke.

I think that the public has conflated questioning authority with discounting the legitimacy of expertise, and that’s a dangerous mix-up.

I found an exception to Betteridge's Law not long ago. The headline was: "Should you get a flu shot?"