5 ms·
Income inequality is a function of how many technologies there are for multiplying one's efforts and how many of these people use. Web apps, manufacturing, bro
by stretchwithme 9y ago
Income inequality is a function of how many technologies there are for multiplying one's efforts and how many of these people use. Web apps, manufacturing, broadcasting, e-commerce, etc. People who don't leverage any of them can't sell to the world. Those who leverage all of them make billions.
Even people who use cars, trucks, ships, block and tackle, nail guns, etc., make more than those who do everything with their hands.
If we want to reduce income inequality, we have to educate people to understand and take advantage of technology. It is the key to prosperity.
And, since there will always be people who don't multiply their efforts with technology, income inequality will only keep increasing. But quality of life for even those at the bottom will keep on improving.
- tmnvix 9y agoI think you'll find that many seriously wealthy people tend to make more money from owning things than they do from producing things.
- owlmirror 9y agoHow can you make money from something without producing? I own things and would love to know this recipe for infinite wealth.
- tmnvix 9y agoBuy land.
- richardknop 9y agoReal estate / land. Buy a bunch of condos and rent them out. You have basically infinite passive income (yes those buildings won't be there forever but relative to your lifespan it is infinite, probably will provide income for your family for several generations) without having to produce or do any labour / work. There is maintenance / repairs to be done but that can be outsourced to a real estate / concierge service.
- stretchwithme 9y agoYes, some money is made by producing things. And some is made by taking care of things and enabling other people to use them. Making things AND making the most of things.
- indubitable 9y agoWhile I would generally agree with you, in principle, I think you're overstating the benefits of any sort of trickle down. Real median incomes have been stagnant [1] for years now. Today the median American household is earning exactly 1.64% more than it was 18 years ago. The real GDP per capita has increased by about 20% in that same time frame. If the economy even blinks, we're going to be back to doing worse than we were decades ago, in terms of the median. And the counter point to increasing productivity is that in times where companies were no where remotely close to market saturation increasing productivity meant better wages, better jobs, and overall growth for everybody. As companies' product reach market saturation increases in productivity translate to layoffs and stagnant wages. It's this constant race between the growth in the number of products to be produced versus our increase in efficiency at producing the products that already exist. The latter seems to be accelerating much faster than the former, and that's not a good thing. To be clear on the above imagine we have n total products being produced. And as wealth and entrepreneurship expand we see a regular increase of about 10% new products being demanded per unit time. Yet our efficiency at increasing products increases at 15% per unit time. That's going to lead to a squeeze on those that rely on production for their livelihood that can only be ended by deceleration in productivity or acceleration in demand for new products. It's debatable whether or not we're in this situation today - but it certainly does explain many otherwise bizarre economic factors quite handily. [1] - https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N
- stretchwithme 9y agoI can't speak to all of the factors that affect how much money people take home. Or how many benefits flow to people in ways other than in their paycheck. Paychecks are not the whole picture and much of what you can buy with the same money adjusted for inflation today is vastly improved. Even ten year old cars are much more reliable than when I first started driving. And that is not in your paycheck.
- turbinerneiter 9y agoWhat about teachers and nurses? Some jobs are negatives affected by increasing productivity. When a nurse can handle twice the patients through technology, the care would get worse as the amount of human interaction is the quality measure here. Same with teachers. Although there could be improvements that reduce the time spent on other things than interaction, thus leaving more time for that.
- stretchwithme 9y agoA nurse that must check each patient periodically is less productive than one who can be alerted to problems electronically. A nurse that must lift patients without mechanically assistance is less productive too.