Carl Setzer

We don't see that what we pay directly influences how well others live. By driving to pay less, always less, we drive down the quality of life for others; this lust for advantage. Now I understand that we expect that the lowered costs come from the horded wealth of the exploiters. Yet, really, that cost is born by the most vulnerable. Where is the sweet spot: customer maximizes their lives, seller theirs? It's truly impossible to know without transparency. Which won't be fully realized without trust. Finding this place of trust, where we can believe, fully, that each party is seeking "win-win", this is the great challenge for humanity. To move past seeking advantage, from exploitation to relationship and respect. To seek out a world where we all grow, all benefit and no one is crushed by inequality. This is my dream, at least.

I groaned when I saw this come through my Twitter feed: Jumping straight to the Nazi/Hitler comparison's really streamlines the descent to trollish online discussion. No need to wade through all that high-falutin, intellectual discussion; jump straight to the trash talk! Weak rhetorical technique, I'm afraid. I won't bother with deconstructing the analogy Mr. Perkins presents, Tim Fernholz did a good job at that on Quartz . I do, however, want to explore the main point: the growing discontent at our income disparity. Mr. Perkins statement brings to mind a misconception that's paralyzing the income inequality debate. "You're just jealous of our success", generally rattled off defensively. Now I've grown weary of this. It's simply knee-jerk defensive justification that serves no purpose. Simply, it's folks' like Mr. Perkins way to avoid dealing with the larger issue. And, of course, the role they play both in the causality of the situati...