I think you made an inferential leap beyond what I wrote. I only said different people are good at differnet things. I wasn't assigning value to people's different abilities, merely noting them. That's why I don't view it as natural hierarchy. You appear to be inferring that certain abilities are more valuable in some sense, so that those who have them are top-of-hierarchy. I'm not sure that's right. In fact I think it is not.

well, that might be true--i'd have to track down the other threads in which this has come up to know. i had a sense that you were making a hierarchy argument, but it's possible that i inserted that. if i dont forget to do it, i'll try to have a look. one never knows.

well, bear in mind that I don't regard someone who has a lot of money as being better than someone who doesn't. With that caveat in mind, sure, go right ahead.