[kpw94]

> But when people talk about "fairness", it usually means quality of life right?

Seems you're focusing on the Floor whereas pg refers to a Ceilings?

It's normal that enterprise sales lovers ends up as taller poppies than pottery lovers. You could take it a step further and say: it's normal than Tom Brady and Ronaldo ends up rich but mediocre football players make $0 from football, even though both have interest in football.

That's the typical Ikigai diagram stuff: if someone's "what you love" naturally aligns with "what you can be paid for", pg point is that this person will be richer. (On top of this, if someone's "what you're good at" also aligns naturally with "what you can be paid for", they'll also be richer).

But you're approaching a different question: do pottery lovers have a good enough quality of life? Do they deserve one if nobody needs any of their pottery stuff?

Does everyone's deserve a good quality of life regardless of what their passion is? What about people with antisocial passions (crime, exploiting others etc)?

[euvin]

I think you make a really good point at the end, that those with antisocial and pathological passions shouldn't be encouraged for the sake of societal health. They can really make a huge profit if done in a certain way, right? Exploiting others like using dark patterns or scams definitely can reap huge rewards.

As a layman, I'm curious to know what you and others think about what standards should be held to meet the floor, what standards should be held to reach the ceiling.