Hacker News Reader

That's not really related to my point, which was that your definition of slavery is a non sequitur.

Of course it is. You asserted that by my definition every human was a slave. This is obviously false since there is a minority that managed to free themselves from this suffering somehow. They make others do the work for them.

People with means also have to work to preserve their position - at the very least they need to navigate laws, invest smartly, be on the lookout for possible political upheavals etc. Nothing is free, and wealth preservation can be a lot of worry in itself. Just ask anyone in the FIRE subreddit.

Of course, technically you're right - there will always exist a minority of people who were so wealthy (and lucky) that, even though they didn't care about wealth preservation, their wealth didn't run out before they died. If, in addition, these people inherited all their wealth (as opposed to doing any work to obtain it), then they are the (only) non-slaves by your definition, proving that not EVERYONE is a slave.

An excellent point. Only 99% of all people are slaves.

Still, calling people like Warren Buffet or Steve Jobs (none of them inherited wealth) "slaves" severely misses the point.

But the only one who did that was you.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com