> slave morality

I think if you're saying: "These billionaires are bad because they do bad things, and being so rich makes their capacity for harm much worse."

That's not slave morality, at least not necessarily, because the "doing bad things" can probably be expressed using normal classic values. It becomes slave morality when you abbreviate the above to: "These billionaires are bad because it's bad for anybody to be so rich."

▲

trinsic2 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Yeah but I don't think this is being said here.

Are you just trying make a point outside of what is being said? I'm hearing people saying the first part in many of these responses.

	▲	mikkupikku 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I'm responding to troosevelts question, not accusing anybody in particular of one or the other. I've seen plenty of both on the internet, but in general I don't think it's slave morality unless somebody is saying that having so much money is intrinsically evil, that to have gotten that much money is wrong in itself, regardless of what the individual actually did or is doing.