3 ms·
There is a wealth of literature on the subject, no pun intended. Thomas Piketty's "Capital in the 21st Century" (or, more practically, summaries of it) offers o
by boucher 7y ago
There is a wealth of literature on the subject, no pun intended. Thomas Piketty's "Capital in the 21st Century" (or, more practically, summaries of it) offers one interesting perspective. A different take can be seen in books like "Winners Take All" by Anand Giridharadas.
On the most basic level, you should question your own premises. The reality of extreme wealth inequality is that rich people do have a substantially outsized say in running the government and exercising other forms of power, and they are often able to evade laws as well as engage in activity that is harmful to the poor.
- mythrwy 7y agoBut the problem in that case is the way government is set up (folks can "buy" government etc.). I don't think the best way to solve that problem is saying people can have less money but rather fix the systemic issues (lobbyists, opportunities for corruption, the campaign contribution circus etc). And manifestly not allow abuse of the poor by those with money. What seems to happen the other way is sort of like what happens in China (or other parts of the world). Becoming a bureaucrat is an income producing commodity. And that has a worse outcome than Bezos buying a newspaper in my opinion. But I also agree with the problems you point out. They are issues with the way things are running right now in the US for sure that should be addressed and it is hard to do because monied interests stymie attempts.