It answers the core of the questions he raised and linked to: is it wrong for the rich to have luxuries?
> I don't think this answers the quoted question at all. the question isn't about whether the money was earned or not, or even how it should be spent. Rather it's about the doucheyness of writing about it.
So you're telling me that someone writing about how they bought a motorcycle and a chopper trip is so offensive that they need to self-censor or be censored?
He has the right to write this piece and you have the right to not read it.
I do not know Justin and I can't speak for him, but it seems to me that he has earned every penny that he has.
> So the question I have here is, was he aware of how outrageously douchey this article comes off with the examples being off the cuff entirely over-the-top money blowing that he apparently regularly indulges in, or are rich people so in their own world that they don't even realize how normal people live and that writing something like this comes off as absurd to most people?
Your comment is more absurd than his spending habits. You are suggesting that he should be socially restrained in one form or the other from spending his hard earned money. From exercising his financial freedom (yes, the ability to spend money without worry is a hard won freedom) because of your own perceptions of class narratives.
To apply your logic to you, do you sacrifice 100% of your disposable income because some children somewhere are starving? Do you go out? Do you drink when you go out? Do you believe that those dollars couldn't save the life of someone dying from AIDS in a developing country? If yes, then why don't you work to give away every single penny you have to that cause? Why do you buy that beer and by doing so condemn that person to death?
Clearly you can see the fallacy over here. Not only are these problems something that can't be solved by throwing money at them - people have tried and failed at that, but there isn't a fixed pie or some upper limit of the gross value that can exist in this world. That Harley he bought paid for engine research in one form and the creation of a supply chain that could be used to build engines that can be adapted to the conditions of rural Zimbabwe.
However, beyond those fallacies lies the idea of freedom I initially talked about. It is important for us to make our own choices. In other words, what Justin does or does not do to solve broader social problems is his and his decision alone. He pays his taxes. You pay yours. What he does or he doesn't do with his dimes is quite simply none of your business.
> I don't think this answers the quoted question at all. the question isn't about whether the money was earned or not, or even how it should be spent. Rather it's about the doucheyness of writing about it.
So you're telling me that someone writing about how they bought a motorcycle and a chopper trip is so offensive that they need to self-censor or be censored?
He has the right to write this piece and you have the right to not read it.