3 ms·
> Instead it's made us richer. some of us, anyway http://www.cbsnews.com/news/census-data-half-of-us-poor-or-low-income/ I wonder what it means when half o
by clort 11y ago
> Instead it's made us richer.
some of us, anyway
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/census-data-half-of-us-poor-or-low-income/
I wonder what it means when half of the richest country in the world lives in poverty..
- RobinL 11y agoThere are clearly serious problems with wealth and income distribution. However, the size of the pie and the distribution of it are different problems (although not independent). It doesn't follow that by prohibiting technological progress things would be more equal. I'm not sure what the relationship is between income distribution and progress; I think there are probably arguments both ways. For example, would income inequality be rising even if technological progress was not happening? Probably yes, from my reading of Pikkety. Those with capital would probably continue to accumulate more. But it would affect returns to capital so perhaps it's not so clear cut. Is income inequality increasing as a result of technological progress? Maybe, I guess? I'd be quite interested to see some real evidence either way because I don't think the answer is intuitive either way.