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

Have US Income and Wealth Inequality Actually Increased?

chawkins.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–97 of 97 posts

Re: Have US Income and Wealth Inequality Actually Increased?

#91

Post by coldtea »

rpenguin13 wrote: post #82
coldtea wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Institutionalized theft isn't an acceptable solution. Such class jealousy does not, historically, end well. Historical precedents are not, historically, very useful. Lots of things that worked at some point in time for some country (e.g a revolution) failed at other points in time for some other country and vice versa. Each era has unique factors -- from technology to culture. You cannot make assumptions based on w…

Institutionalized by whom? In a society of voluntary contracts, those who have lots of wealth DO deserve it, and if they're clear under law then they DID get it all themselves, and "Society" is a mythical being: it has no right to forcibly steal from some more wealthy individuals. "Oh, so you built this house from LEGO blocks during break hour while the other kids where playing around?" "Yes" "It'd be better off for…

>Institutionalized by whom?

By those in power, now and in the past.

>In a society of voluntary contracts, those who have lots of wealth DO deserve it

For one, the form and reach of those "voluntary contracts" were made with no direct involvement from the population. Were you consulted when you grew up on how they'd be, apart from voting every 4 years or so?

Do the grandchildren of an industrial robber barron, "DO deserve" the money they inherited?

How about all the families that got rich by exploiting slaves? Do their descendants deserve their higher status in society they enjoy?

How about people with large real estate? How exactly Native American territories become the property of some real estate tycoons back in the day (and are passed forward now)?

Just because the law accepts a transition from then to now, doesn't mean the "deserve" question is settled.

>"Society" is a mythical being: it has no right to forcibly steal from some more wealthy individuals.

Well, society is the people. Nothing mythical about it. It's the origins of property that are mythical, as land and resources start off as free for all.

Rather, it's a social contract that allows the wealthy individuals to be wealthy. There's no "right" in that (except if you believe in God given rights), just what is deemed acceptable. That's something that can be reversed at any time, as the kings in France found out.

Re: Have US Income and Wealth Inequality Actually Increased?

#92

Post by ctdonath »

mjn wrote: post #86
ctdonath wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Insults? attacks? where? And yes there are lines which, when crossed with threat of force, will be met with force.

And a tax rate is that line? I cannot think of any change in tax policy that would induce me to shoot a human.

The American Revolution was fought in large part over tax rates (and much lower ones than we're subject to now). Confiscate enough of one's fairly-earned wages and and he'll fight back.

Re: Have US Income and Wealth Inequality Actually Increased?

#93

Post by ctdonath »

mjn wrote: post #86
ctdonath wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Insults? attacks? where? And yes there are lines which, when crossed with threat of force, will be met with force.

And a tax rate is that line? I cannot think of any change in tax policy that would induce me to shoot a human.

You threaten to shoot a human to enforce that tax policy.

Re: Have US Income and Wealth Inequality Actually Increased?

#95

Post by holograham »

guscost wrote: post #72
holograham wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wealth is built by extracting that wealth from a shared economy. This is wrong. First wealth is not extracted from people...it is created from a voluntary exchange. Think about why people handed over money to the "wealthy" in the first place. It was in exchange for a good or service that made that person wealthy where wealth is defined by being better off than they were before. Money is just a unit of exchange that…

For the most part I agree with this explanation, but it does not apply to certain cases such as inheritance. Unfortunately the tendency to portray all wealthy people as entitled heirs has been around since the days of explicit aristocracy.

how does it not apply for inheritances? That money that was inherited came from delivering a good or service in a voluntary exchange. Just because the money was passed down a generation doesnt mean that money was acquired any different way.

I think you may be trying to point out that the inheritance isnt deserved because the receiver didnt create the wealth. I see inheritances as how the rich choose to spend their money. Some give it to charity, some give it to their kids (which could be a form of charity), some spend it frivolously. Doenst change the fact that the money was generated by creating wealth in the first place.

Re: Have US Income and Wealth Inequality Actually Increased?

#96

Post by holograham »

brenschluss wrote: post #74
holograham wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wealth is built by extracting that wealth from a shared economy. This is wrong. First wealth is not extracted from people...it is created from a voluntary exchange. Think about why people handed over money to the "wealthy" in the first place. It was in exchange for a good or service that made that person wealthy where wealth is defined by being better off than they were before. Money is just a unit of exchange that…

> Following this logic the wealthy have already paid their dues so to speak by making other people more wealthy. Wow, so simplistic. Answer this, then: Why are poor people poor?

I assume this question is to bait me into a debate about equal opportunity, discrimination, and wealthy privilege. I do not contend that there aren't issues to solve in these arenas.

So for the simple economic answer: Poor people are poor because they consume more wealth than they create (or at least break even).

Again as to not offend, I fully understand that economic well-being is still dependent on circumstance to a degree that needs to be addressed. But this fact does not change the economic answer to why poor people are poor.

Re: Have US Income and Wealth Inequality Actually Increased?

#97

Post by cobrausn »

mjn wrote: post #80
cobrausn wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For better or for worse, the guy working hard to replace your roof is easier to replace than you are - this is because you have a skill set he doesn't that takes a lot of time and resources to develop. In addition, your work (likely) brings in more money to a company than his. As such, you get paid more. As an aside, have you ever noticed that (certified) plumbers and electricians make a lot of money? Same reasoning.…

> I don't have a problem making more money now that I made myself valuable. That could be part of our differences in outlook. I don't feel I've really "made myself" valuable, I just have skills and interests that happened to be valuable. I've liked computers since I was a kid, and am reasonably adept with them. When I grew up, somewhat to my surprise, I found out people paid quite a bit of money for that kind of thin…

That difference in early career opportunities could easily be a part of it (the difference in outlook). I'm just saying there is no need to feel guilty - the world and the economy are fairly malleable, and it doesn't value hard work as much as it values hard work at something that is in demand, so 'following your passion' may not be the best way to make money. As you have said, it has never really been much different, it's just what people demand has changed.
Post reply on HN