Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Income inequality is not the problem, it's a symptom

blog.rongarret.info

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 242 posts

Re: Income inequality is not the problem, it's a symptom

#91

Post by vonklaus »

cpursley wrote: post #68

If I could give away all my hn points and apply them as up-votes to this, I would. The op explains very succinctly the problem in this quote: > what is happening is that the ultra-wealthy are using their disposable income to buy political influence, then using that influence to get laws passed that allow them to collect rents. My primary beef with American politics is the "solutions" are always in the form of bandaid…

Interesting perspective. I wonder how much "cronyism" costs. It is a problem, but how big?

Sort of the issue is that their is a systemic change taking place globally and it moves at a compounding rate.

Most governments on a micro scale, are inefficient snd comprised of largely unaccountable people. They make (benevolent/naive view) decisions but are ill equipped with the skills to make the proper ones or (cynical) intentionally extract bwnefit. On a macro stage, we are still dumping money into infrastructure in competition with eachother. If we had all the best engineers working on space for example and collaborating, this would be good, or working to solve things collaboratively.

Luckily as PG notes there is a massive defragmentation. I would argue this is great. Agency is redestributed to people in this way and the effects of this will be evident in ~5 years when the laggard affects of technology overtake many legacy industries.

Cable is being challenged.

The monetary system is being challenged.

This election cycle will highlight apathy. It will be realized soon enough that the government will have much less power and is thus, less neccessary.

Etc.

Also, I just saw The Big Short. The L3 money supply (which is super complicated and I don't pretend to fully grasp) is basically mbs in ~2005.

Re: Income inequality is not the problem, it's a symptom

#92

Post by chei0aiV »

grecy wrote: post #53
puredemo wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lol that is some pretty rosy thinking, I hope you're being sarcastic about the math on this.

I was being serious. Have a look at how things are done in Scandinavian countries, Australia, New Zealand. We have very few obscenely rich people in Australia, and we have no desperate people.

> Australia, and we have no desperate people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_Australia

Re: Income inequality is not the problem, it's a symptom

#93

Post by gpsx »

rayiner wrote: post #10

Mr. Garret quotes Sanders: > The reality is that for the past 40 years, Wall Street and the billionaire class has rigged the rules to redistribute wealth and income to the wealthiest and most powerful people of this country. I am rather puzzled that this idea gets so much traction. Does anyone really believe that if only the rules weren't "rigged" local shops and businesses would be able to compete against Wal-Mart a…

There is a lot of talk here about income inequality being a fairness problem, but not as much about it being an economic problem. But if people don't have money they can't buy anything. If those poor people had more money they would just go back to Walmart and give it back to the Waltons, which is a good thing to have that economic activity.

Wealth gains are not a zero sum game. It is about how much we produce. If the economy is not operating at peak productivity (for example with a lot of people out of work), then not as much wealth is created. And this will happen when there a lot of people who can't buy much, making demand low. It is a vicious cycle.

In the US the wealthy have lobbied to push down their taxes, and this is an example of what people mean when they say the system is rigged. This can help those rich people on an individual level and in the short term. But it also effectively takes that money out of the economy, since the rich typically don't go and spend that money but save it instead. If that money went to taxes it would have stayed circulating in the economy, whether it is used to pay for college tuition or used on some pork barrel project.

This is the argument made by some for economic inequality hurting the economy.

Re: Income inequality is not the problem, it's a symptom

#94

Post by cpursley »

vonklaus wrote: post #91
cpursley wrote: post #68

If I could give away all my hn points and apply them as up-votes to this, I would. The op explains very succinctly the problem in this quote: > what is happening is that the ultra-wealthy are using their disposable income to buy political influence, then using that influence to get laws passed that allow them to collect rents. My primary beef with American politics is the "solutions" are always in the form of bandaid…

Interesting perspective. I wonder how much "cronyism" costs. It is a problem, but how big? Sort of the issue is that their is a systemic change taking place globally and it moves at a compounding rate. Most governments on a micro scale, are inefficient snd comprised of largely unaccountable people. They make (benevolent/naive view) decisions but are ill equipped with the skills to make the proper ones or (cynical) in…

Yeah! I'm pretty positive. We're at a pinnacle point where for a lot of big problems, technology / private industry is going to be more effective than the solutions any nation state will be able to provide. Interesting times ahead; governments will need to adapt and focus on what they're good at rather than react defensively.

Re: Income inequality is not the problem, it's a symptom

#95

Post by Turing_Machine »

drewcrawford wrote: post #52
UK-AL wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you believe in property rights? Having a legal/police system to catch people who forcebly take property? Using trade to exchange property? This is the core of our system. And that system will always generate inequality. Not necessarily a bad thing. You can have laws to take the edge off inequality generated, but at the core of the system you can't really avoid it.

You can absolutely avoid it. Inequality was so much less in the 1950s/1960s and we still had police and property. The disconnect here is that property rights are "more guidelines than actual rules", they are quite literally "made up". It used to be that keeping a black person out of your store was a "property right", until we decided it wasn't, and then we got rid of that one. It used to be that preventing airplanes…

"Inequality was so much less in the 1950s/1960s"

To a first approximation every single person on the planet had far less in the 1950s/1960s.

"Equality" sucks if it means that everyone is equally impoverished.

Re: Income inequality is not the problem, it's a symptom

#96

Post by Turing_Machine »

ubernostrum wrote: post #69
UK-AL wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you believe in property rights? Having a legal/police system to catch people who forcebly take property? Using trade to exchange property? This is the core of our system. And that system will always generate inequality. Not necessarily a bad thing. You can have laws to take the edge off inequality generated, but at the core of the system you can't really avoid it.

Do you believe in property rights? As a useful legal fiction subject to the same limitations as others of its genus, sure. As a natural moral right? Not in the slightest, because there ain't no such thing. The history of "ownership" of any given thing today is basically a history of force, fraud and the occasional lucky break. Who should own a piece of land? What moral claim do they have to it? The very best that can…

Could you post your address? I'll bet you have a lot of stuff that other people could use, and since you don't believe in property, you surely won't have any objections to them taking it.

Re: Income inequality is not the problem, it's a symptom

#97

Post by Spooky23 »

rubyfan wrote: post #45
UK-AL wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you believe in property rights? Having a legal/police system to catch people who forcebly take property? Using trade to exchange property? This is the core of our system. And that system will always generate inequality. Not necessarily a bad thing. You can have laws to take the edge off inequality generated, but at the core of the system you can't really avoid it.

Clearly the parent does not believe in property rights when they believe unskilled non-differentiated labor should be rewarded with above market rates by force and at the expense of Walmart's shareholders. That individuals believe government should be directed at investors who risk their property to create wealth in order to take by force that property to redistribute it is perhaps the most offensive sentiment. > The…

Let them eat cake!

(The concept didn't work out so well for Marie Antoinette)

If a revolution comes and you find yourself thrown up against a wall somewhere, remember your comment this evening.

Re: Income inequality is not the problem, it's a symptom

#99

Post by ubernostrum »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #96
ubernostrum wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you believe in property rights? As a useful legal fiction subject to the same limitations as others of its genus, sure. As a natural moral right? Not in the slightest, because there ain't no such thing. The history of "ownership" of any given thing today is basically a history of force, fraud and the occasional lucky break. Who should own a piece of land? What moral claim do they have to it? The very best that can…

Could you post your address? I'll bet you have a lot of stuff that other people could use, and since you don't believe in property, you surely won't have any objections to them taking it.

Wow, you sure did destroy that straw man over there.

Now, do you want to try engaging with the actual argument (property is a useful legal fiction, not an inherent moral right)?

Re: Income inequality is not the problem, it's a symptom

#100

Post by mwcampbell »

gizi wrote: post #80

It can all be reduced to the problem of man-made law. It is wide open to abuse. So, yes, the ultra-rich abuse man-made law to make more money. But then again, machine guns easily overrule money. That is why there are now islamic insurgencies, in 30+ countries, of which the primary purpose is to get rid of man-made law (and to establish their favoured alternative). The problem goes way beyond the distribution of incom…

What alternative to man-made law would you propose?
Post reply on HN