Is Inequality Inevitable? • Hacker News Board

Re: Is Inequality Inevitable?

#301

Post by roenxi » Thu, Nov 07, 2019, 12:39 AM UTC

TomMckenny wrote: post #262

SiVal wrote: post #193

There is a popular political perspective that rules on campus these days that treats wealth as something that just magically exists and is simply "redistributed" by one means or another like, say, a phase change in physics where no magnetism/charge/energy/etc. is ever created or consumed. I waited for a point in their model where people actually produced wealth and consumed it, made something or ate it, in addition t…

There is no philosopher involved, in this case there is the wealth expended to produce an item. In your idealized example both parties are better off but the one that traded the item and took less effort to make it is comparatively better off. He will have advantages in future trades which will further increase. Not to mention a bigger voice in societal structure. (which is a tldr; of the article) Anecdotally you met…

Increasing the GDP is really easy, the government can pass a law adding a zero to all measures of money (so $10 becomes $100). Reducing inequality is also easy, confiscate people's wealth.

The real problem is "people are not secure in their lifestyle" which is not addressed by the first solution and is probably exacerbated by the second. People getting antsy about inequality as a final problem instead of a symptom of another issue are not going to find their way to solutions that increase prosperity.

Re: Is Inequality Inevitable?

#302

Post by adrianmonk » Thu, Nov 07, 2019, 12:39 AM UTC

Inequality is a tricky word. At first I disliked it because, for me, it's a non-goal to have everyone equal.

I know there are some people who are willing to work harder than me, and I don't mind if they have more wealth. I also know there are people who don't want to work as hard. (This isn't meant as judgement, I'm just saying I'm somewhere in the middle.)

But let's not be black and white about it. I'm OK with some variation, but with some kind of limits. It wouldn't be reasonable for someone to receive a million times the reward for working twice as hard.

And although I'd prefer a better term, many people seem to use "inequality" as concise term for that. I don't love the choice of terminology (too prone to misinterpretation), but I can handle it.

Re: Is Inequality Inevitable?

#303

Post by deehouie » Thu, Nov 07, 2019, 12:40 AM UTC

wuliwong wrote: post #230

SiVal wrote: post #193

There is a popular political perspective that rules on campus these days that treats wealth as something that just magically exists and is simply "redistributed" by one means or another like, say, a phase change in physics where no magnetism/charge/energy/etc. is ever created or consumed. I waited for a point in their model where people actually produced wealth and consumed it, made something or ate it, in addition t…

I received a Ph.D. in physics in 2010, throughout my training, my anecdotal experience was that of an echo chamber. I didn't fully realize it until I left academia. Although, it was slowly becoming apparent as the years passed. My experience was of a relatively small and closed group of physicists who reaffirmed each other's assumption that they were at the absolute peak of intellectual thought. Most of the professor…

I think you're a bit burnt out from physics, thus this rather cynical view of physicists' approach to an important economic problem.

The mathematical models you find in the works of many highly regarded economists are even more simplistic, more vulnerable to criticism.

"When you have such hubris and make such simple mistakes..." that pronoun "you" should be the economists!

Re: Is Inequality Inevitable?

#304

Post by michelinman » Thu, Nov 07, 2019, 12:40 AM UTC

anm89 wrote: post #264

michelinman wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Downvotes? At least explain.

This is totally incoherent. What are you trying to say?

And the Silicon Valley ref was about how they get away with it.

Re: Is Inequality Inevitable?

#305

Post by deehouie » Thu, Nov 07, 2019, 12:41 AM UTC

trentnix wrote: post #299

wuliwong wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I received a Ph.D. in physics in 2010, throughout my training, my anecdotal experience was that of an echo chamber. I didn't fully realize it until I left academia. Although, it was slowly becoming apparent as the years passed. My experience was of a relatively small and closed group of physicists who reaffirmed each other's assumption that they were at the absolute peak of intellectual thought. Most of the professor…

Thinking in isolation and with pride ends in being an idiot. - GK Chesterton

Albert Einstein did much of his greatest work in isolation, and he was quite proud, too.

Re: Is Inequality Inevitable?

#306

Post by chongli » Thu, Nov 07, 2019, 12:43 AM UTC

pasquinelli wrote: post #290

chongli wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Earth has finite resources: finite land, finite minerals, finite water, finite energy. When people accumulate vast amounts of wealth, they place a large portion of these finite resources under their own control. If we allow people and families to accumulate wealth indefinitely, it’s not hard to imagine a future whereby a very small elite control a vast majority of the resources. In this future, people can still c…

That's a fair description of the past too.

At no time in the past were we in danger of reaching the limits of our planetary resources. There was always somewhere else to go, some other resources untapped. In the future that will no longer be the case, unless we manage to settle among the stars.

Past performance does not guarantee future results. The story of our society was not written with a fairytale ending. Whether we succeed and create a better future for all or destroy ourselves or create a hellish dystopia, there are no guarantees.

Re: Is Inequality Inevitable?

#307

Post by tathougies » Thu, Nov 07, 2019, 12:45 AM UTC

WilliamEdward wrote: post #277

taneq wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I waited for a point in their model where people actually produced wealth and consumed it, made something or ate it, in addition to redistributing it. Not part of the model. That’s because the people making the models don’t create wealth and don’t really understand where it comes from. It’s like the way you see Marxists saying “seize the means of production” but never “build the means of production”.

Not so sure you understand what means of production are. You cannot build more means of production without having access to means of production in the first place, hence the 'seizing' part.

But all humans of sufficient ability (except those with extreme mental handicap) have innate means of production. Even those who have lost use of their limbs have an innate means of production via their minds in the form of intellectual property. Honestly, even many with mental disability but physically capable are capable of producing value from relatively little.

Re: Is Inequality Inevitable?

#308

Post by tathougies » Thu, Nov 07, 2019, 12:47 AM UTC

Empact wrote: post #238

ameister14 wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>An accelerating and historically high broad societal effect is naturally a product of broad and unique properties of the current regime, rather than fundamentally consistent properties, which would naturally be seen across all time. You're completely correct here. Unfortunately, neither the current levels of income inequality nor the acceleration of said inequality is unique or historically high. It's not even uniqu…

I'm talking about measures like these, which granted, are only recorded back 100 years or so: https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2015/demo/gini... https://economistsview.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451b33869e201a5... https://www.getrevue.co/profile/mark-abdelnour/issues/abd-s-...

But in those times, relatively rich Americans were selling to extremely poor Europeans, Asians, and Africans. Inequality overall has gotten better, just the geography has shifted substantially so that previously homogeneously equitable places now have a more representative share of world inequality.

Re: Is Inequality Inevitable?

#309

Post by tropo » Thu, Nov 07, 2019, 12:48 AM UTC

nostrademons wrote: post #125

lmilcin wrote: post #66

A lot of it misses the point. Equality is unavoidable as long as people are allowed to compete for stuff. If people are allowed to compete for property then those that are better at competing will have more property. It might be possible to have property equality when people have access to same things but compete for different things, for example status, choice of partners, etc. And the most important point people se…

> Inequality does not mean we need to have people who can't satisfy their most basic things. It is possible for people to be allowed to compete for wealth and at the same time ensure those that don't want or can't compete have their basic needs like food, shelter and medical care satisfied. How? I get that there's a lot of waste and inefficiency in those industries. Whenever zoning laws prevent a developer from build…

You could safely relax the regulations that set the bar for becoming a licensed MD.

Knocking 2 or 3 years off would be easy. Right now, the first step to becoming a licensed MD is to get a BS or BA degree. Any degree will do the job, though it is expected that certain classes will have been taken. This is taking 4 years, but meeting the legitimate needs for medical school should only take about 1 or 2 years.

I'll work it out, based on what Yale specifies:

These are bright people, so assume that they have AP credit for all 3 basic sciences. That leaves 1 semester of organic chemistry and 1 semester of biochemistry. That's it. Checking prerequisites at UCF, biochemistry requires Organic Chemistry II. We could thus be looking at 3 semesters. Do the biochemistry over the summer, and it's just one year.

Despite this, Yale requires attending at least 3 years for an undergraduate degree. Yale doesn't care at all what the degree is. It could be music history, military science, creative writing, or whatever. You just need to put in the time, a minimum of 3 years. To help you waste time, not even a "5" on the AP tests will be accepted by Yale.

All we're accomplishing here is a supply limitation. We jack up the time and expense to become a licensed MD. We also shorten the resulting career by 2 or 3 years.

Re: Is Inequality Inevitable?

#310

Post by danans » Thu, Nov 07, 2019, 12:50 AM UTC

kjhkhkj wrote: post #159

lmilcin wrote: post #66

A lot of it misses the point. Equality is unavoidable as long as people are allowed to compete for stuff. If people are allowed to compete for property then those that are better at competing will have more property. It might be possible to have property equality when people have access to same things but compete for different things, for example status, choice of partners, etc. And the most important point people se…

> when people have access to same things but compete for different things, for example status, choice of partners, etc. People are already complaining about inequality of status and partners. Why is inequality of wealth less just than those other things? > Inequality does not mean we need to have people who can't satisfy their most basic things I honestly don't understand why and moral arguments are not convincing.

> I honestly don't understand why

When people are inhibited from meeting their basic needs legally by structural impediments to their progress like severe inequality, they sometimes try to meet their needs via methods that are destructive to society, like crime, whether petty or violent. That behavior is usually damaging to people, property, or the fabric of society.

This is a reason why such crime is strongly correlated with areas of endemic poverty.

People have a strong will to survive, one way or another. We can provide them the tools and resources to do so in a prosocial way, or spend the resources defending ourselves against the crime that results from poverty stricken circumstances.