10 ms·

Without incentives, there is no innovation. And if everyone is entitled to the same portion of the pie, what’s the incentive to work harder? Seeing your neighb

by aantix 8y ago

Without incentives, there is no innovation. And if everyone is entitled to the same portion of the pie, what’s the incentive to work harder? Seeing your neighbor put in a third of the effort and produce the same economic result is demoralizing.

stetrain 8y ago
Do you think that in the US that your effort put in is always reflected in your economic result? That those with lower economic results are only those who put in less effort than their neighbor?
bluntfang 8y ago
Did your incentives create the system or did the system create you incentives? I think that's a worthwhile thought to reflect on.
cagenut 8y ago
you may be driven by spite and jealousy, but thats you buddy, don't project it on the rest of us.
anthony_romeo 8y ago
I don’t think the poster above suggested that everyone is entitled to the same portion of the pie, so I’m not sure why you made that leap
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  It’s a standard technique to stop the discussion. As soon as someone mentions inequality just shout “socialism” and “incentives “. Never mind that nobody argues that everybody should get exactly the same but the question is how much more of the pie the top should get and whether their share should keep increasing.
  - aantix 8y ago
    You have access to “the top” through resourcefulness and risk taking. But if one is not inclined to be that type, I’m not sure what ensures them to the rewards of those willing to do so?
    - unclebucknasty 8y ago
      >You have access to “the top” through resourcefulness and risk taking You forgot generational wealth. In the U.S. the class into which you are born determines the class you'll reach more than any other factor. Overwhelmingly. It's not even close. So, it's doubtful that poor people's problem is that they just don't take enough risks.
      - donaldknuth123 8y ago
        >In the U.S. the class into which you are born determines the class you'll reach more than any other factor. Overwhelmingly. It's not even close. Who would downvote this, the data isn't even remotely controversial. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/01/economists-your-parents-are-more-important-than-ever/283301/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/01/economi...
      - chosenbreed37 8y ago
        > In the U.S. the class into which you are born determines the class you'll reach more than any other factor. Overwhelmingly. It's not even close. Interesting...I've always thought of the US as being more of a meritocracy than the UK and Europe in general. I mean that is what the American dream is all about right?
        WalterSear 8y ago
        Americans do. The cultural script that the playing field is inherently fairer than anywhere else is what makes them accept bad conditions without question.
        maxxxxx 8y ago
na85 8y ago
Are you suggesting that there is no middle ground between barbaric US-style capitalism and forced redistribution of wealth?
- leetcrew 8y ago
  the barbaric US already has forced redistribution of wealth.
normal_man 8y ago
I think the idea that free-market capitalism drives innovation is not something you can take for granted at all. How many companies making copycat apps that serve no purpose or complete bullshit like Juicero get millions in funding?
- anonuser123456 8y ago
  You literally gave an example for why free-market capitalism supports innovation; e.g. the product was stupid and the market rejected it.
  - kamarg 8y ago
    The market rejecting a product has nothing to do with innovation. It's people saying I can't afford this or I don't value this at the price you're selling it at, or even I don't like the politics of someone that works for you. But it says nothing about if a product is innovative or not.
    - nybble41 8y ago
      Innovation includes factors like actually being able to manufacture the product at a price people are willing to pay. If something is worth at most $10, coming up with a novel way to do it for less than $10 is innovative; coming up with a way to do it for $1000 is just wasting time. It's easy to come up with crazy, impractical ideas. The essence of innovation is turning those ideas into sustainable, marketable, and thus profitable products.
arandr0x 8y ago
I just think people who come in late at the party because their kid was sick and they're mentally ill and they live way out in the middle of the country and there's no pie left should at least get a couple apples or something.
- wincy 8y ago
  My kid is disabled and I have severe anxiety and suffered depression. I live right in the middle of the US. I didn’t start my tech career until 28 because of all that, but I’m doing ok. I live in a big house with good schools. From what I’ve gathered of non-US (European) tech jobs, I’d never have gotten an opportunity to work as a programmer because I never got a bachelors degree. Maybe it isn’t like that everywhere, but it feels good that a high school dropout can make 6 figures and live in a 2000 square foot house and easily support two kids and a stay at home wife. I’d also likely never have learned to control my issues and gotten proper treatment if I hadn’t been left almost homeless when my family kicked me out for dropping out of college. As long as things were “good enough”, I poured my heart and soul into noble ventures like my World of Warcraft career (300 days played)! and League of Legends. I know I’m not everyone, in fact I’m likely an exceptional case, none of my friends who grew up similarly to me ended up achieving what I have, but if the safety net was too comfortable I doubt I’d have ever felt the need to climb out of it once I fell into it. I’m personally glad to live in the USA despite its flaws.
  - arandr0x 8y ago
    It's great that you were able to do that, and I've been to Europe (not where the country I was referring to is located) and I agree with you about the degree. That said, it's just emotional on my part like I said in the OP. Yeah I knew people who were poor and who probably spent their entire life since that time doing drugs and collecting their assistance checks. (And to be fair I knew people who were rich and probably spent their entire life since that time doing drugs and collecting their monthly allowance. Both are far from the norm of the rich/poor people. They're just specific examples of not caring much about your life beyond it going on.) I prefer to live in a world where five hundred thousand people are sitting on their asses doing nothing passing the seconds till their death through their own choices than in a world where fifty thousand people are running ragged feeling their bodies waste away not knowing where their time goes through the choices of people who just wanted a nicer lawn. The first world seems like it has more happiness per capita plus the outcome of each is a result of things like effort. The second world seems like it belongs in a SF story about the unchosen ones.
Temasik 8y ago
>>incentives >>linus torvalds
Pulcinella 8y ago
This is a pretty negative outlook on humanity. People do things for reasons other than making money. Also seeing your boss put in a third the effort and produce 10 times the paycheck is also demoralizing...
- aantix 8y ago
  Of course they do. They’re called hobbies. But do they take massive risks without potential massive reward? A lot wouldn’t. Unless they’re under the rule of a dictator and their life is threatened. That’s an incentive.
  - elliekelly 8y ago
    Wouldn't? Or can't given the lack of safety nets? If the worst-case scenario is starting over perhaps the risk isn't so "massive." But when the worst-case scenario is starving then it's certainly a massive risk.
  - lghh 8y ago
    Most people who can take "massive risks" end up, at worst, in the same situation as the average American if they fail. The average American, on the other hand, can't take those risks at all because they could end up homeless or with mountains of medical debt. Reducing how far you can fall would allow for more risks to be taken.
- criley2 8y ago
  Seeing your boss do it teaches you to become the boss. Seeing your neighbor do it teaches you to switch jobs and work 1/3 as hard. The reason this doesn't work is the same incentives people are discussing. If there are high-paying easy jobs, people will demand them and theoretically the wages will fall until demand for the job tapers off. All of this is a bit unfair though, because "having a social safety net where poor people can have vacations and a happy life" is a lot different than the myopic, mean-spirited conservative reply of "but my neighbor is a lazy jerk who makes more than me!"
- PakG1 8y ago
  Temper this with the understanding that many workers don't have a good view of what their boss actually does and just assume that their boss puts in a third of the effort, when in fact he might put in much much more and the situation may also be difficult to fathom. https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3156692 https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3156692
unclebucknasty 8y ago
Why does every conversation about social safety nets or a more equitable distribution of wealth involve a rebuttal by one group that goes directly to fulminant communism, the likes of which has never existed? And, how does that same group--that is supposedly so concerned about fairness--see as fair, a status quo which favors capital over labor to an untenable degree?
- FussyZeus 8y ago
  Because of internalized anti-Russia propaganda. If the person is young enough to have not been around during the Cold War, they just internalized it from their parents instead of the Government.
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  It’s just a technique. Don’t allow for nuance but take everything to the extreme and the discussion is closed.
RobertoG 8y ago
Well, then, surely, most of the innovation is coming from the poorest people.
emptyfile 8y ago
Ah yes, because any critique of the american system must mean that the poster supports full on communism.
ragebol 8y ago
But does that incentive need to be so huge? Would innovation not happen anymore when the incentive was reduced to say 1%, 10% or 25% etc? My motivation for doing what I do (which I'd classify as innovative) is not (just) the money. The money is nice too, but I don't think I could work in e.g. finance because I like technology and developing new stuff.
- tomjen3 8y ago
  If I didn't get paid I would still be writing code, and a good deal more complicated, but I probably wouldn't care to make the output something users needed. As for reducing the incentives, that is already done quite heavily: the US income tax about 1/3. With that you should be able to create a very effective safety line, it is not the successfuls fault it is pissed away on political corruption and a wasteful war on drugs/minorities.
- anonuser123456 8y ago
  >but I don't think I could work in e.g. finance because I like technology and developing new stuff. Right, most people don't want to work in finance. They do so because of the money. And generally financial CEOs/CFOs are smart enough to only pay workers what they have to. So the incentives are probably priced appropriately. "Innovation" always takes a ton of muck work that has very little glory. I work at a chip company. For every engineer doing cutting edge work, you have 10 people doing very unsexy support tasks that are 100% necessary. These are roles people do because they pay well, not because they are interesting.
donaldknuth123 8y ago
What is the point of innovation without progress? So San Francisco can house dozens of billionaires while also facing an astonishing homelessness crisis? You can create all the apps and gadgets you want but if you don't improve peoples lives or in fact actively hurt them what exactly are you achieving besides personal enrichment?
ikurei 8y ago
> And if everyone is entitled to the same portion of the pie, what’s the incentive to work harder? Huge strawman. Who's arguing for total and absolute equality of our outcomes? I live in one of those "safety net" countries. We aren't all entitled to the same share of the pie, it's just that hard-working people don't have to go hungry or work 2 jobs just to get by, or at least not that often. People can get a very good and valued education without going into debt, and cancer doesn't make you go poor. I get a greater share of the pie than most of my friends, because I was wise at choosing degree, and worked harder at it, and also I was lucky enough to be born with some mild gifts. But when friend's parents get sick, the families don't have to go into debt to get a great treatment. I can't be expected to know how the economy and society will change, and whether they will leave me stranded after a bubble bursts or something. We can't all be great economists; not that they get it right either. I'll work my ass off to avoid that, but I'm glad to know my compatriots have my back (to some extent), as I have theirs now.
laurentl 8y ago
This is a bit of a strawman argument: the parent post does not claim that everyone should have the same share of the pie, but that one should get a minimal share rather than nothing.
cmsonger 8y ago
> Seeing your neighbor put in a third of the effort and produce the same economic result is demoralizing. Sorry to hear you are neighbors with a hedge fund manager. Do you have someone who inherited wealth on the other side of you too? That would be hell. ;)
0xfeba 8y ago
I don't think anyone's suggesting everyone get the same portion. I just think that if you work 40 hours (or 35, or whatever we determine is "fulltime"), you should be able to support you and your dependents without going bankrupt if you get cancer.
lghh 8y ago
Trust me, I don't work 3x harder than most of the people I make 3x of. My wife is a teacher and I am in tech, I make 3x her salary. She works way more and spends more of both her physical and emotional labor on her job. I work hard and I do good work, but what she does is not even in the same stratosphere as what I do. I'm not innovating anything, I'm just writing decent code. She's finding new ways to help kids learn. Which sounds more demoralizing?
- linkmotif 8y ago
  Teaching is a straw man. Teachers get paid poorly because (1) Americans don’t actually care about education, as evidenced by the amount teachers make, and (2) it’s a government-based monopoly that prioritizes “benefits” and graft (tenure, etc) over salary
  - lghh 8y ago
    Straw men don't exist, my wife does exist.
    - linkmotif 8y ago
      But you use her in logic based arguments and then appeal to emotion so.... which is it? Your gripe shouldn’t be with rich people, it should be with Americans en masse, who yelled and screamed all Sunday night in my apartment building about grown men running into each other on TV with such a passion you’d think they were educating their children. And then they’re poor? Boo hoo. Maybe if Americans cared about education, showed passion for it like they do about Football, I would understand. You get paid 3x your wife because Americans care about what you produce, and they don't care about what she produces. It’s easy to soak the rich but take a look around you, people prioritize everything except the one thing that matters: education.
      - lghh 8y ago
        > But you use her in logic based arguments and then appeal to emotion so.... which is it? My appeal was to the amount of effort required between jobs. > And then they’re poor? Boo hoo. Poor people are allowed to have hobbies and interests just as well as the rich. This sentiment is disgusting and you should be ashamed. > You get paid 3x your wife because Americans care about what you produce, and they don't care about what she produces. Trust me, I have worked jobs where I have been paid very, very well where nobody has cared about what I produced except the couple of people who were paying me.
bpyne 8y ago
I think you're creating a false dichotomy: either you accept a large gulf between those who have/have not and innovation or you create a society with a more even distribution and no innovation. As I read comments to socio-economic posts from people in various parts of Europe, it seems as though Germany, France, etc. are developing a middle way. As a native to the US, I think we really need to pay more attention to the middle way. We could use a little more social harmony.
wvenable 8y ago
As others have said, tons of people work harder than me but make less than me. My wife works at least as hard as I do for less pay. It's less about how hard you work and more about what you know. But sometimes it's even less than that -- it's about perceived value rather than actual value. You could lose an important secretary and the business might lose a lot of money but often that isn't perceived like that.

by aantix 8y ago

stetrain 8y ago

Do you think that in the US that your effort put in is always reflected in your economic result? That those with lower economic results are only those who put in less effort than their neighbor?

bluntfang 8y ago

Did your incentives create the system or did the system create you incentives? I think that's a worthwhile thought to reflect on.

cagenut 8y ago

you may be driven by spite and jealousy, but thats you buddy, don't project it on the rest of us.

anthony_romeo 8y ago

I don’t think the poster above suggested that everyone is entitled to the same portion of the pie, so I’m not sure why you made that leap

maxxxxx 8y ago
It’s a standard technique to stop the discussion. As soon as someone mentions inequality just shout “socialism” and “incentives “. Never mind that nobody argues that everybody should get exactly the same but the question is how much more of the pie the top should get and whether their share should keep increasing.
- aantix 8y ago
  You have access to “the top” through resourcefulness and risk taking. But if one is not inclined to be that type, I’m not sure what ensures them to the rewards of those willing to do so?
  - unclebucknasty 8y ago
    >You have access to “the top” through resourcefulness and risk taking You forgot generational wealth. In the U.S. the class into which you are born determines the class you'll reach more than any other factor. Overwhelmingly. It's not even close. So, it's doubtful that poor people's problem is that they just don't take enough risks.
    - donaldknuth123 8y ago
      >In the U.S. the class into which you are born determines the class you'll reach more than any other factor. Overwhelmingly. It's not even close. Who would downvote this, the data isn't even remotely controversial. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/01/economists-your-parents-are-more-important-than-ever/283301/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/01/economi...
    - chosenbreed37 8y ago
      > In the U.S. the class into which you are born determines the class you'll reach more than any other factor. Overwhelmingly. It's not even close. Interesting...I've always thought of the US as being more of a meritocracy than the UK and Europe in general. I mean that is what the American dream is all about right?
      - WalterSear 8y ago
        Americans do. The cultural script that the playing field is inherently fairer than anywhere else is what makes them accept bad conditions without question.
      - maxxxxx 8y ago

na85 8y ago

Are you suggesting that there is no middle ground between barbaric US-style capitalism and forced redistribution of wealth?

leetcrew 8y ago
the barbaric US already has forced redistribution of wealth.

normal_man 8y ago

I think the idea that free-market capitalism drives innovation is not something you can take for granted at all. How many companies making copycat apps that serve no purpose or complete bullshit like Juicero get millions in funding?

anonuser123456 8y ago
You literally gave an example for why free-market capitalism supports innovation; e.g. the product was stupid and the market rejected it.
- kamarg 8y ago
  The market rejecting a product has nothing to do with innovation. It's people saying I can't afford this or I don't value this at the price you're selling it at, or even I don't like the politics of someone that works for you. But it says nothing about if a product is innovative or not.
  - nybble41 8y ago
    Innovation includes factors like actually being able to manufacture the product at a price people are willing to pay. If something is worth at most $10, coming up with a novel way to do it for less than $10 is innovative; coming up with a way to do it for $1000 is just wasting time. It's easy to come up with crazy, impractical ideas. The essence of innovation is turning those ideas into sustainable, marketable, and thus profitable products.

arandr0x 8y ago

I just think people who come in late at the party because their kid was sick and they're mentally ill and they live way out in the middle of the country and there's no pie left should at least get a couple apples or something.

wincy 8y ago
My kid is disabled and I have severe anxiety and suffered depression. I live right in the middle of the US. I didn’t start my tech career until 28 because of all that, but I’m doing ok. I live in a big house with good schools. From what I’ve gathered of non-US (European) tech jobs, I’d never have gotten an opportunity to work as a programmer because I never got a bachelors degree. Maybe it isn’t like that everywhere, but it feels good that a high school dropout can make 6 figures and live in a 2000 square foot house and easily support two kids and a stay at home wife. I’d also likely never have learned to control my issues and gotten proper treatment if I hadn’t been left almost homeless when my family kicked me out for dropping out of college. As long as things were “good enough”, I poured my heart and soul into noble ventures like my World of Warcraft career (300 days played)! and League of Legends. I know I’m not everyone, in fact I’m likely an exceptional case, none of my friends who grew up similarly to me ended up achieving what I have, but if the safety net was too comfortable I doubt I’d have ever felt the need to climb out of it once I fell into it. I’m personally glad to live in the USA despite its flaws.
- arandr0x 8y ago
  It's great that you were able to do that, and I've been to Europe (not where the country I was referring to is located) and I agree with you about the degree. That said, it's just emotional on my part like I said in the OP. Yeah I knew people who were poor and who probably spent their entire life since that time doing drugs and collecting their assistance checks. (And to be fair I knew people who were rich and probably spent their entire life since that time doing drugs and collecting their monthly allowance. Both are far from the norm of the rich/poor people. They're just specific examples of not caring much about your life beyond it going on.) I prefer to live in a world where five hundred thousand people are sitting on their asses doing nothing passing the seconds till their death through their own choices than in a world where fifty thousand people are running ragged feeling their bodies waste away not knowing where their time goes through the choices of people who just wanted a nicer lawn. The first world seems like it has more happiness per capita plus the outcome of each is a result of things like effort. The second world seems like it belongs in a SF story about the unchosen ones.

Temasik 8y ago

>>incentives >>linus torvalds

Pulcinella 8y ago

This is a pretty negative outlook on humanity. People do things for reasons other than making money. Also seeing your boss put in a third the effort and produce 10 times the paycheck is also demoralizing...

aantix 8y ago
Of course they do. They’re called hobbies. But do they take massive risks without potential massive reward? A lot wouldn’t. Unless they’re under the rule of a dictator and their life is threatened. That’s an incentive.
- elliekelly 8y ago
  Wouldn't? Or can't given the lack of safety nets? If the worst-case scenario is starting over perhaps the risk isn't so "massive." But when the worst-case scenario is starving then it's certainly a massive risk.
- lghh 8y ago
  Most people who can take "massive risks" end up, at worst, in the same situation as the average American if they fail. The average American, on the other hand, can't take those risks at all because they could end up homeless or with mountains of medical debt. Reducing how far you can fall would allow for more risks to be taken.
criley2 8y ago
Seeing your boss do it teaches you to become the boss. Seeing your neighbor do it teaches you to switch jobs and work 1/3 as hard. The reason this doesn't work is the same incentives people are discussing. If there are high-paying easy jobs, people will demand them and theoretically the wages will fall until demand for the job tapers off. All of this is a bit unfair though, because "having a social safety net where poor people can have vacations and a happy life" is a lot different than the myopic, mean-spirited conservative reply of "but my neighbor is a lazy jerk who makes more than me!"
PakG1 8y ago
Temper this with the understanding that many workers don't have a good view of what their boss actually does and just assume that their boss puts in a third of the effort, when in fact he might put in much much more and the situation may also be difficult to fathom. https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3156692 https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3156692

unclebucknasty 8y ago

Why does every conversation about social safety nets or a more equitable distribution of wealth involve a rebuttal by one group that goes directly to fulminant communism, the likes of which has never existed? And, how does that same group--that is supposedly so concerned about fairness--see as fair, a status quo which favors capital over labor to an untenable degree?

FussyZeus 8y ago
Because of internalized anti-Russia propaganda. If the person is young enough to have not been around during the Cold War, they just internalized it from their parents instead of the Government.
maxxxxx 8y ago
It’s just a technique. Don’t allow for nuance but take everything to the extreme and the discussion is closed.

RobertoG 8y ago

Well, then, surely, most of the innovation is coming from the poorest people.

emptyfile 8y ago

Ah yes, because any critique of the american system must mean that the poster supports full on communism.

ragebol 8y ago

But does that incentive need to be so huge? Would innovation not happen anymore when the incentive was reduced to say 1%, 10% or 25% etc? My motivation for doing what I do (which I'd classify as innovative) is not (just) the money. The money is nice too, but I don't think I could work in e.g. finance because I like technology and developing new stuff.

tomjen3 8y ago
If I didn't get paid I would still be writing code, and a good deal more complicated, but I probably wouldn't care to make the output something users needed. As for reducing the incentives, that is already done quite heavily: the US income tax about 1/3. With that you should be able to create a very effective safety line, it is not the successfuls fault it is pissed away on political corruption and a wasteful war on drugs/minorities.
anonuser123456 8y ago
>but I don't think I could work in e.g. finance because I like technology and developing new stuff. Right, most people don't want to work in finance. They do so because of the money. And generally financial CEOs/CFOs are smart enough to only pay workers what they have to. So the incentives are probably priced appropriately. "Innovation" always takes a ton of muck work that has very little glory. I work at a chip company. For every engineer doing cutting edge work, you have 10 people doing very unsexy support tasks that are 100% necessary. These are roles people do because they pay well, not because they are interesting.

donaldknuth123 8y ago

What is the point of innovation without progress? So San Francisco can house dozens of billionaires while also facing an astonishing homelessness crisis? You can create all the apps and gadgets you want but if you don't improve peoples lives or in fact actively hurt them what exactly are you achieving besides personal enrichment?

ikurei 8y ago

> And if everyone is entitled to the same portion of the pie, what’s the incentive to work harder? Huge strawman. Who's arguing for total and absolute equality of our outcomes? I live in one of those "safety net" countries. We aren't all entitled to the same share of the pie, it's just that hard-working people don't have to go hungry or work 2 jobs just to get by, or at least not that often. People can get a very good and valued education without going into debt, and cancer doesn't make you go poor. I get a greater share of the pie than most of my friends, because I was wise at choosing degree, and worked harder at it, and also I was lucky enough to be born with some mild gifts. But when friend's parents get sick, the families don't have to go into debt to get a great treatment. I can't be expected to know how the economy and society will change, and whether they will leave me stranded after a bubble bursts or something. We can't all be great economists; not that they get it right either. I'll work my ass off to avoid that, but I'm glad to know my compatriots have my back (to some extent), as I have theirs now.

laurentl 8y ago

This is a bit of a strawman argument: the parent post does not claim that everyone should have the same share of the pie, but that one should get a minimal share rather than nothing.

cmsonger 8y ago

> Seeing your neighbor put in a third of the effort and produce the same economic result is demoralizing. Sorry to hear you are neighbors with a hedge fund manager. Do you have someone who inherited wealth on the other side of you too? That would be hell. ;)

0xfeba 8y ago

I don't think anyone's suggesting everyone get the same portion. I just think that if you work 40 hours (or 35, or whatever we determine is "fulltime"), you should be able to support you and your dependents without going bankrupt if you get cancer.

lghh 8y ago

Trust me, I don't work 3x harder than most of the people I make 3x of. My wife is a teacher and I am in tech, I make 3x her salary. She works way more and spends more of both her physical and emotional labor on her job. I work hard and I do good work, but what she does is not even in the same stratosphere as what I do. I'm not innovating anything, I'm just writing decent code. She's finding new ways to help kids learn. Which sounds more demoralizing?

linkmotif 8y ago
Teaching is a straw man. Teachers get paid poorly because (1) Americans don’t actually care about education, as evidenced by the amount teachers make, and (2) it’s a government-based monopoly that prioritizes “benefits” and graft (tenure, etc) over salary
- lghh 8y ago
  Straw men don't exist, my wife does exist.
  - linkmotif 8y ago
    But you use her in logic based arguments and then appeal to emotion so.... which is it? Your gripe shouldn’t be with rich people, it should be with Americans en masse, who yelled and screamed all Sunday night in my apartment building about grown men running into each other on TV with such a passion you’d think they were educating their children. And then they’re poor? Boo hoo. Maybe if Americans cared about education, showed passion for it like they do about Football, I would understand. You get paid 3x your wife because Americans care about what you produce, and they don't care about what she produces. It’s easy to soak the rich but take a look around you, people prioritize everything except the one thing that matters: education.
    - lghh 8y ago
      > But you use her in logic based arguments and then appeal to emotion so.... which is it? My appeal was to the amount of effort required between jobs. > And then they’re poor? Boo hoo. Poor people are allowed to have hobbies and interests just as well as the rich. This sentiment is disgusting and you should be ashamed. > You get paid 3x your wife because Americans care about what you produce, and they don't care about what she produces. Trust me, I have worked jobs where I have been paid very, very well where nobody has cared about what I produced except the couple of people who were paying me.

bpyne 8y ago

I think you're creating a false dichotomy: either you accept a large gulf between those who have/have not and innovation or you create a society with a more even distribution and no innovation. As I read comments to socio-economic posts from people in various parts of Europe, it seems as though Germany, France, etc. are developing a middle way. As a native to the US, I think we really need to pay more attention to the middle way. We could use a little more social harmony.

wvenable 8y ago

As others have said, tons of people work harder than me but make less than me. My wife works at least as hard as I do for less pay. It's less about how hard you work and more about what you know. But sometimes it's even less than that -- it's about perceived value rather than actual value. You could lose an important secretary and the business might lose a lot of money but often that isn't perceived like that.