Pretty simplistic because obviously this is an extreme case to average all scores. But if you took 10% of the top score and added to the bottom scores it's more

Pretty simplistic because obviously this is an extreme case to average all scores. But if you took 10% of the top score and added to the bottom scores it's more like a tax and the people at the top probably don't mind as much. I think when it comes to things like universal basic income, the idea to pay people directly implies that there is a base level of money that results in people being somewhat satisfied. But in reality I don't think it would ever. In Seattle where I live, some homeless people live in tents below the freeway near downtown because that is the only place they can afford within the area they want to be at. So if they had a basic income that allowed them to afford a house 30 miles from downtown would they live there? Good chance some would but some would not. Basically socialism only works if people think they are getting a good deal. That's how most people feel in countries like Sweden. They feel like they have a really nice country and really nice doctors and schools and services. The taxes are high on the rich but even the rich are not complaining too much. I think capitalism is a good way to motivate people but it's kind of like a game theory thing.. Basically you have to come up with a way to benefit the group in order to help yourself. The lone rich guy might actually not be rich for long if the mob comes and takes it away. The discussion about the middle class disappearing I think is code for "jobs that used to pay really well for doing not that hard of jobs are going away".. Like in an era when robots can move pallets back and forth in a warehouse 24/7 should a forklift driver make $30/hr? The basic point is that jobs that are easy to replace either with a robot, a foreign worker, or less people we should expect there will be less of them. So training our workforce needs to be tailored to suit that reality.