3 ms·
The main thrust is that this seems to simply be a consequence of differing ability/circumstance, and there is no counter-example in recorded history - even our
by cal5k 9y ago
The main thrust is that this seems to simply be a consequence of differing ability/circumstance, and there is no counter-example in recorded history - even our views on the "noble savage" are probably skewed by the fact that large hunter-gatherer societies with enough wealth to allow accumulation have been stamped out.
The follow-on question is: what do we do about it? Attempts to artificially "correct" inequality for the sake of correction are universally disastrous. Progressive taxation and redistribution are, I think, reasonable, as is universal basic income, and sound government has a huge role to play. But the goal should be to provide basic services and create opportunity for the bottom 50%, not wrest control of wealth from the top 1%.
The goal of actually stamping out inequality is a fool's errand.
- wiz21c 9y agoFortunately, thanks to your solution, the basic services for the bottom 50% will make them no less free than slaves... (admittedly, history happens like that but it's been continually fought)