3 ms·

I'm not sure that class-based polarization is inherently problematic. Surely some degree of inequality is an inviolable consequence of a society that values bo

I'm not sure that class-based polarization is inherently problematic. Surely some degree of inequality is an inviolable consequence of a society that values both freedom and private ownership. Imagine an America in which the poorest families had two cars and a four-bedroom house, in a safe neighborhood with good schools. Would it then be considered problematic if Gates and Buffet became trillionaires? The problem is poverty; the problem is that the south pole is too far south. It's problematic that many still don't have access to the fundamental Maslow's. The space between the poles isn't.

deciplex 11y ago
> Imagine an America in which the poorest families had two cars and a four-bedroom house, in a safe neighborhood with good schools. Would it then be considered problematic if Gates and Buffet became trillionaires? Yes, it would be very problematic, but not out of any sense of fairness. Unless you can find a way to decouple wealth and power, such an outsized accumulation of wealth (and therefore, of power) would be a threat to democracy. Your hypothetical, even if achievable, is not a stable one because the ruling and capitalist classes would own our government to a degree that would make even our present situation look like a sort of egalitarian paradise. It would quickly become hopelessly corrupt, and without robust representation in government, it would only be a matter of time before the rest of us were remade into serfs.
fweespeech 11y ago
> I'm not sure that class-based polarization is inherently problematic The way people behave when there is class-based polarization in the US is inherently problematic. The simple fact is the lower class has to be subsidized and that money largely has to flow from the upper class. The middle class, for the most part, is a break even proposition once you factor in the cost of Medicare & Social Security for the middle class. Its a large part of why one party is so quick to blame "entitlements" is as long as they can remain on the offensive, their benefactors are largely protected.
Retra 11y ago
If you have enough inequality in your society it will stop valuing freedom and private ownership. That's the problem.

deciplex 11y ago

> Imagine an America in which the poorest families had two cars and a four-bedroom house, in a safe neighborhood with good schools. Would it then be considered problematic if Gates and Buffet became trillionaires? Yes, it would be very problematic, but not out of any sense of fairness. Unless you can find a way to decouple wealth and power, such an outsized accumulation of wealth (and therefore, of power) would be a threat to democracy. Your hypothetical, even if achievable, is not a stable one because the ruling and capitalist classes would own our government to a degree that would make even our present situation look like a sort of egalitarian paradise. It would quickly become hopelessly corrupt, and without robust representation in government, it would only be a matter of time before the rest of us were remade into serfs.

fweespeech 11y ago

> I'm not sure that class-based polarization is inherently problematic The way people behave when there is class-based polarization in the US is inherently problematic. The simple fact is the lower class has to be subsidized and that money largely has to flow from the upper class. The middle class, for the most part, is a break even proposition once you factor in the cost of Medicare & Social Security for the middle class. Its a large part of why one party is so quick to blame "entitlements" is as long as they can remain on the offensive, their benefactors are largely protected.

Retra 11y ago

If you have enough inequality in your society it will stop valuing freedom and private ownership. That's the problem.