Bean, you are one bitter person with a very narrow perspective. There was a time when most of what we reefers do was a practical, and therefore ethical, imfeasiability. That changed. Much of what most of us want to do remains financially imfeasable. However, give somebody a big enough well of resources and desire, and you get... well, not to put too fine a point on it: visionaries who achieve that which has yet to been achieved. As a historian, I could post a dissertation in support of this statement, but I really don't have as much time as you... And things are a little different in California in terms of such an undertaking, but only because of the year-round weather. It is diferent than Pitts, PA. Finally, you just keep missing the point: as long as it's done with respect to ethically sustaining the inhabitants, then what does someone with a 200g reef look like compared to someone with 12k g? IT'S NOT YOUR PLACE TO JUDGE!! Pose reasonable questions for consideration, absolutely, but please, stop trying to defend what isn't a position of an absolute but a personal opinion about how someone should expend their resources. You aren't being reasobably helpful in the form of skepticism; you're being unreasonably pessimistic by suggesting that you know something can't or shouldn't be done, when you don't know that it can't and it isn't your place to say with absolute certainty that it shouldn't.
Have a lovely day, Bean.