3 ms·
Inequality isn't the right measure unless you make some assumptions that have, historically, not held (e.g. fixed total amount of wealth). All you care about i
by endtime 8y ago
Inequality isn't the right measure unless you make some assumptions that have, historically, not held (e.g. fixed total amount of wealth). All you care about is that the poorest people can afford somewhere to live.
Toy example: If everyone can afford a home, and then Jeff Bezos increases his wealth by 1000x, inequality goes up but no one becomes homeless.
I'm not saying wealth inequality is meaningless, but I think making it a primary concern creates an instance of Goodhart's law.
- cwkoss 8y agoWe should measure and optimize for the the growth in wealth of the bottom X percent of citizens. Who makes up that portion may change, but that portion will consistently be the one that needs the most help.
- endtime 8y agoThat seems like a better metric to me as well. Though solutions which maximize this and also increase inequality are often unpopular (e.g. free markets).