21–30 of 139 posts
Thank you! As soon as those wealth inequality posts started popping up I've been waiting for someone to point out the idiocy of lamenting the wealth inequality between 22 yearolds just entering the workforce and 65 yearolds about to retire.
For instance, the ability of the older wealth to influence politics.
According to Wikipedia, 87% of the wealth belongs to the wealthiest 20%. However over 80% of that wealth belongs to the top half of that group. The figures I am looking at do not break it down farther, but my understanding is that this same relative relationship holds for the top 5%, 2%, 1%, and so on. Everyone agrees that some wealth disparity is a good and necessary part of a healthy economy. But there is a lot mor…
"Everyone agrees that some wealth disparity is a good and necessary part of a healthy economy." Nope.
It is difficult to see how to avoid wealth disparity. We can argue all day about whether that is good or evil, but it is a dangerous and destructive proxy for the complex question that, I believe, most of us actually want to answer: How do we get the most good to the most people while simultaneously preserving most or all of the autonomy, freedom, and privacy that Western cultures traditionally also value?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Money is a terrible motivator? lol. What's this nonsense? Give me your name and address, I'll write you a check for $1500 free and clear to take back what you just said.
And we could threaten someone's family to show the counterpoint to that point. Money's a great motivator until you're near your threshold earnings, and then other things start slipping in, like, for instance, the ability to make a point. Then, of course, is the discussion about why anyone wants money...and the fact that there's more direct ways to affect the value in someone's life. Hate to sound the sociopath, but m…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No you don't. Money is a terrible motivator. If the only thing that is keeping you from working hard is the prospect of making more money, might I suggest that you've chosen the wrong career? I'm not saying that Equalland is desirable. I'm just saying that I think you're overestimating the effect money has on how productive people are.
Money is a terrible motivator? lol. What's this nonsense? Give me your name and address, I'll write you a check for $1500 free and clear to take back what you just said.
And for the record, nobody paid me to write that comment in the first place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No you don't. Money is a terrible motivator. If the only thing that is keeping you from working hard is the prospect of making more money, might I suggest that you've chosen the wrong career? I'm not saying that Equalland is desirable. I'm just saying that I think you're overestimating the effect money has on how productive people are.
Can I hire you? Money doesn't motivate you right? Minimum wage, no benefits and 80hr weeks are required.
Thank you! As soon as those wealth inequality posts started popping up I've been waiting for someone to point out the idiocy of lamenting the wealth inequality between 22 yearolds just entering the workforce and 65 yearolds about to retire.
I'd argue, as a 22 year old economist just entering the workforce, that the fact that people just entering their retirement hold the most wealth is quite a social problem. For instance, the ability of the older wealth to influence politics.
We see this play out clearly in their ability to influence politics. E.g. they can vote themselves unsustainable entitlement benefits at the expense of younger generations.
Thank you! As soon as those wealth inequality posts started popping up I've been waiting for someone to point out the idiocy of lamenting the wealth inequality between 22 yearolds just entering the workforce and 65 yearolds about to retire.
I'd argue, as a 22 year old economist just entering the workforce, that the fact that people just entering their retirement hold the most wealth is quite a social problem. For instance, the ability of the older wealth to influence politics.
Therefore, everyone between 18 and 24 years of age gets 10 votes, between 24-30 9, etc, until people over 78 get zero votes (just like minor children under 18).
This would deal with the problem nicely. And yes, I am kidding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No you don't. Money is a terrible motivator. If the only thing that is keeping you from working hard is the prospect of making more money, might I suggest that you've chosen the wrong career? I'm not saying that Equalland is desirable. I'm just saying that I think you're overestimating the effect money has on how productive people are.
Money is a terrible motivator? lol. What's this nonsense? Give me your name and address, I'll write you a check for $1500 free and clear to take back what you just said.
But not inequality of outcomes. There are simply too many variables between individuals that affect outcomes. Some are randomly assigned at birth. Others are the result of individual choice.
Even if you eliminated all injustice, however you define it, individual choice and different ability would still produce inequality of outcome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And we could threaten someone's family to show the counterpoint to that point. Money's a great motivator until you're near your threshold earnings, and then other things start slipping in, like, for instance, the ability to make a point. Then, of course, is the discussion about why anyone wants money...and the fact that there's more direct ways to affect the value in someone's life. Hate to sound the sociopath, but m…
After reading your post, I'm tempted to tell my boss to compensate me instead with hugs, rainbows, high fives and other family-like perks. Since family should motivate me more than money can.