SirDoom said:
I have one small problem with this logic. So, quick question- what exactly is "bad" about this purchase?
Don't get me wrong, it's wasteful and rather stupid, I know. I just fail to see any harm coming from it. If anything, it beats the alternative of "man lets 4 billion dollars sit in bank account for 100 years", as in this case at least a few boat builders are getting a paycheck.
"The money could have been used to feed starving children" is a valid argument in stating that there are better alternatives to this boat, butthat doesn't mean the boat was a bad choice. The lack of good does not imply bad.
I would compare it to... let's say a guy tied to some train tracks. If I randomly stumble upon him and free him, then that is obviously a good decision. However, seeing him and failing to free him isn't a bad choice. I'm not directly responsible for any harm, and while I probably could have saved him if I tried harder, it doesn't make me a bad person.
It's wasteful. Waste is bad. There's nothing this boat provides that a lesser boat wouldn't.
That insanely expensive boat provides no benefit whatsoever even to himself.
He's losing that money anyway without getting any tangible benefit from it, he could used it to benefit those who need it. Instead the only persons who benefit are those promoting waste and egocentric posturing and probably already rich.
It's a bad choice.
It's like stumbling upon a man tied to some train tracks, walking over and cutting off his watch and necklace while you already possess a perfectly fine watch and necklace and then walking of again. You expend the effort of cutting something free anyway, but instead of cutting something free that benefits others you cut something free that doesn't even benefit yourself (as you already have a watch and necklace) but only serves to improve your vanity.