[xandar11]

Why are people obsessed with this topic lately?

Do you think fame inequality is a problem? There are people who have 100s of millions of followers/fans and then there are people who are not famous (vast majority).

Why is that not considered a problem?

Fame inequality:

1. Undermines democracy. If you have a tiny group of famous people who have a massive cultural influence, their ideas and opinions matter almost infinitely more than ideas of those who are not famous. This by definition undermines the idea that everyone's opinion/vote should have equal weight.

2. Damages people's health. When people see someone famous it can make them depressed because they are constantly being compared to cultural icons. This can have serious impact on psychological health.

3. Perpetuates itself. People can become famous and get a leg up in life just because their parents are famous. Is that fair to all talented people who don't have famous parents?

[conanbatt]

It is feasible to believe a dystopian reality on economic inequality. Some economists have even argued that it was inequality that toppled vast empires, due to the inherent improductive consequences of economic inequality.

Inequality can be a problem alone, even if all else is equal ,because the greatest danger to freedom is the concentration of power, and what is inequality but the concentration of wealth and power into fewer hands?

[solidsnack9000]

It is closely tied to wealth inequality. Famous people without wealth are not likely to influence much, nor are they likely able to make their children famous.

[sintaxi]

People are obsessed with this topic because they are looking for justification to steal from those wealthier than them. Its textbook Marxism.

[dang]

Please don't take HN threads on generic ideological tangents. They lead to flamewars and are reliably some of the most low-quality subthreads we see here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html