A Response to Paul Graham’s Article on Income Inequality

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jan 03, 2016, 12:13 AM UTC

guelo wrote: post #27

jgord wrote: post #9

PGs articles aren't wrong - but they are second order, when we need a first order response to a current evil [ before it leads to bloody revolution ] If you look at income distribution its a hockey stick - you really have to slap yourself on the face and realise there is no middle class - what you thought of as professional-middle-class-contributor is actually college-debt-burdened-lower-class - no matter how many ye…

What's interesting about this election is that so much of the anger, especially from lower class whites, is being channeled into the Republican party. It's not a cry for wealth distribution, it's a cry against immigrants supposedly taking our jobs. And that's a big failing by the Democrats to tap into that anger. But I think this is going to be typical of elections going forward, red hot anger being directed at the s…

Post by boona » Sun, Jan 03, 2016, 12:15 AM UTC

Post by Estragon » Sun, Jan 03, 2016, 12:23 AM UTC

roymurdock wrote: post #78

ryandamm wrote: post #20

I think it's useful to draw a bright line around the 'value creation' that PG is referring to, also. It's not just creating chairs, it's aggregating great wealth by 'disrupting' traditional industries. Those traditional industries have workers and shareholders who lose out. What makes successful startups so profitable is they displace a large and less-efficient system with a small, efficient one. Efficient in terms o…

> Piketty's suggested policy response is simple: high taxes on aggregated wealth. You need to go one step further and outline where and how the federal government should put this new tax revenue to work. How much should we raise taxes? Which brackets? What form of wealth do we tax? Why taxation rather than issuing bonds? What percent of gov revenue should we allocate to the DoD? How much to Social Security and Medica…

  > You need to go one step further and outline where and how
  > the federal government should put this new tax revenue to
  > work.

Post by Estragon » Sun, Jan 03, 2016, 12:27 AM UTC

Pyxl101 wrote: post #82

owyn wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not as if wealthy people take their money and put it under their mattress. No, they invest it. That investment money flows to other corporations who then spend it on goods and services, or spend it on their employees. No they don't. From what I've read (Piketty etc) they do not re-circulate it into the general economy. They use investment vehicles which are increasingly divorced from "real world" economics and m…

> They use investment vehicles which are increasingly divorced from "real world" economics and more like moving chips around on a poker table. Which investment vehicles are those? You cannot in general invest money into vehicles which earn a good return but which are divorced from the real world. Imagine if you invest in a company like Apple. Apple developed products like the iPod and iPhone, and the company's value…

  > Which investment vehicles are those?

Post by laarc » Sun, Jan 03, 2016, 12:32 AM UTC

Estragon wrote: post #158

laarc wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's true. My first role was to work an unpaid intern for a year. Then my first salary was $20k, followed by $35k only after working there for a couple years. It was going to be $30k but I was able to negotiate. I think pg is correct, however.

Know any juniors without college degrees in relevant fields?