41–50 of 118 posts
Just want to point out two things: 1) Rognlie[1] pointed out that Piketty's central premise -- that the returns to capital are growing faster than the overall growth rate of the economy -- falls apart when you properly account for asset class and depreciation. The accelerating returns are specifically to real estate , while the returns to capital (excluding real estate) are flat. 2) Tyler Cowen pointed this out on hi…
Quoted post unavailable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
100% inheritance tax on any estate value over $N (inflation indexed), use that money to fund "baby bonds" to give every newborn an investable trust fund. Nobody should get to be rich because of who their daddy was.
This wouldn't force the rich to move elsewhere?
- If you don't allow foreigners, I'll argue that you haven't solved anything. You've simple picked the winners.
- If the ratio of inequality is disrupted, I'd also argue you haven't done anything other than move the problem (and the losers) to the future.
- If you decide not to redistribute, well that's the current situation for better or worse.
Personally I think a better problem to solve is for humanity in general to decide what the minimum level of prosperity should be, worldwide and slowly try to raise this bar. AFAIK this is basically what we're doing. We could raise the bar faster, though.
That said, I do wonder if we're looking at inequality (or more specifically hierarchy) through the wrong lens. It seems like almost all independent societies naturally develop some sort of hierarchy (chief, priest, leader) without any outside influence. To me that points to some underlying natural law or at least a biologically-influenced tendency that higher level social constructs will be ineffective at changing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
^ Precisely. To add to your point: In order for something to be unequal, it had to be obtained via unethical means. This is because the sum of morality of small transactions is transitive. Breaking it down in simple terms: If you voluntarily give your free-earned money to Jeff Bezos, it's an ethical transaction. If millions of people do it, they're all ethical transactions. If Jeff Bezos becomes a go-zillionaire, it'…
What if, after decades of undercutting the competition, you live in a place where your choices are ordering from Amazon or shopping at Walmart? How do I feed myself without giving money to billionaires? Moreover, just because one side of a transaction is voluntary doesn’t mean that the entire business is ethical. Plenty of people voluntarily gave their money for cotton harvested by slaves. Does that mean slavery is e…
Just want to point out two things: 1) Rognlie[1] pointed out that Piketty's central premise -- that the returns to capital are growing faster than the overall growth rate of the economy -- falls apart when you properly account for asset class and depreciation. The accelerating returns are specifically to real estate , while the returns to capital (excluding real estate) are flat. 2) Tyler Cowen pointed this out on hi…
( submitting this as a reference to Piketty's whole school of thought not just the latest book ) ( Discussion prompt: what are some radical ideas for slashing poverty/inequality globally in 2 decades or less - assuming the public support/political will can eventually be obtained through effort/luck )
2. Elimination of usury applied to the money supply of the country in question. That is, issuing money without having a central bank charge interest on the issuance.
I am sure there are more.
Is there a single example in history where income redistribution worked while it was also easy for foreigners to enter the country and growth persisted for everyone while maintaining said ratios of acceptable inequality? - If you don't allow foreigners, I'll argue that you haven't solved anything. You've simple picked the winners. - If the ratio of inequality is disrupted, I'd also argue you haven't done anything oth…
[flagged]
This equating of what-you-put-in to what-you-get-out is a moral choice you can make, but it's easy not to make it. It's widely recognized as hateful. - people's particular successes depend onthw rest of society, they didn't create everything themselves. This should factor into the deservingness calculation. - we have an instinctual desire to take care of the needy (children and elderly in particular); not to honor th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if, after decades of undercutting the competition, you live in a place where your choices are ordering from Amazon or shopping at Walmart? How do I feed myself without giving money to billionaires? Moreover, just because one side of a transaction is voluntary doesn’t mean that the entire business is ethical. Plenty of people voluntarily gave their money for cotton harvested by slaves. Does that mean slavery is e…
There are literally zero laws against setting up a competitor to Amazon or Walmart