You attribute all of that exclusively to a small group of tech ceos?
That's completely absurd, but let's see the data on that.
That's completely absurd, but let's see the data on that.
Is that a way of saying 'I don't actually have any data or numbers backing my absurd claims'?
Your claim was that tech billionaires contributed more towards the good of society than any other group.
You provided a list of metrics that are in no way exclusively attributable to tech billionaires, and no actual data/number on how and how much these are attributable to tech billionaires.
Your analogy is completely unrelated too.
It's more like if you said 'whales are the best animal' and then gave me a bunch of random metrics about the state of the world.
What are you talking about?
I also love how all of your analogies/examples immediately switched from amazing societal improvements to measurements of physical object characteristics. Truly amusing stuff.
Let's take one of the metrics you suggested - 'number of lives saved' - go ahead and tell me how tech billionaires have saved more lives than any other group.
Or maybe just admit that you're talking out of your ass.
Yes the billionaire I listed have saved more lives than 99.999% of humans. They do this by paying for specific individuals to be treated for specific fatal diseases, and by funding research that has led to cures and preventative vaccines that have already saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of people
You also don't seem to understand that if a team of scientists discovered a cure - that doesn't automatically get 100% attributed to whatever billionaire funded the building the scientists were working in at the time.
Also big difference between saying 'X did this good thing' and 'X did more good than everyone else combined'.
And the onus is on you here - you made the absurd claims - now either back them up or walk them back :)