7 ms·

People should fear being destitute its the natural human condition. Learning skills is the only way to make wealth.

nennes 7y ago
That's a common argument to justify inequality. If learning is the key, then why is there such a huge income disparity between men and women? Are women lazy and don't learn?
- toolz 7y ago
  What you're arguing for is equity, not equality. We already have equal opportunity. As for the gender wage gap, if women are so disadvantaged - exactly how do they make up 85% of consumer spending?
  - nennes 7y ago
    How do we have equal opportunity? Can you point me towards evidence of this? I guess you're not arguing about the gender wage gap, as it's a well documented fact. What is the point you're trying to make?
    - rstupek 7y ago
      And yet not everyone can agree on what the cause of said gender wage gap truly is. Is it because women take time off to raise children, thus setting back their wage advancement? Is it because women are less likely to be more vigorous in asking for wage increases than men? Or is just because men are keeping women down?
      - munk-a 7y ago
        As an example... for my wife, her salary was depressed because her boss thought that I make good enough money that she doesn't really need it. I think a lot of women still receive extremely slanted peer reviews due to gender biases (she's really catty, while he tends to raise good arguments), relationship drama (I mean, she's a good worker, but she turned down a drink with me... I don't know how good her judgement is), straight up appearance judgements (Oh, don't give the raise to nancy, she'll have a cushy life with looks like that, barbara could use it more), and harassment (I don't know about that raise - hey what are you doing friday?). I think that everyone feels like we've totally solved gender discrimination forever while it's still really deeply seated in our culture.
    - toolz 7y ago
      What is the point, _you're_ trying to make? If you're trying to show women are financially burdened you can cherry-pick wage gap data to show that, sure, or you can take a more holistic view of society and what do you see? You see women with significantly more purchasing power than men. So are women disadvantaged or is there no incentive to be high earners? For me it's fairly obvious. There will be men and women who become high earners. There will be men and women who are overlooked based on gender. What I see with the wage gap can be fully explained by lack of necessity to earn for women. Think about that for a minute - they earn less than men, but they spend vastly more money than men. Exactly where is the incentive to earn more for women? Should they continue to work and earn more until they make up 90% of consumer spending? 95%? It's beyond me how anyone can claim a group that represents 85% of consumer spending is somehow financially burdened and suffers from inequality. It's almost unfathomable, but here we are.
  - chickenpotpie 7y ago
    Dude, we are faaaaaaaaar from equal opportunity. One of the largest predictors of one's ability to accumulate wealth is still the wealth of their own parents. The U.S. is one of the countries with the highest link between parents' and a child's wealth.
    - bluGill 7y ago
      Citation needed. I hear this often, but no hard evidence that isn't easy to show is false.
      - Shacklz 7y ago
        > Citation needed. Here you go: "The fading American dream: Trends in absolute income mobility since 1940", Raj Chetty et al. https://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6336/398 https://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6336/398
      - denisw 7y ago
        I recommend „Capital in the 21st Century“ by Thomas Pikkety, an economist who has deeply studied wealth and income equality using historical data spanning three centuries. This book has all the evidence you need. https://www.amazon.com/-/de/dp/0674979850 https://www.amazon.com/-/de/dp/0674979850 Spoiler alert: income from wealth is on its way of becoming close to being as concentrated as it was in the 19th century (especially in the US), and the share of income from work in total national income is decreasing almost anywhere. So yes, increasingly you can only accrue significant wealth by already having significant wealth.
- isoskeles 7y ago
  Because you're using data that doesn't control for occupation, hours worked, etc.
  - nennes 7y ago
    So as a gender, women choose lower paid jobs and work less? If this is true and it is a choice, that would mean that women as a gender are either lazy or less qualified. If this is not true then it is evidence of inequality in the selection of employees. I don't see either of the above making your point.
    - isoskeles 7y ago
      > lazy or less qualified No one is saying that, it's more of a strawman you want to use to, I'm not sure, maybe accuse people who disagree with you of sexism. Or could you explain why you use those words rather than assume we think it's, let's suppose, just a choice based on differences in average values men and women have?
      - nennes 7y ago
        My argument is that -as a society- we don't really accept that women are facing tons of difficulties that men don't experience, because of their sex. For example, sometimes it's because they might choose to have a baby in the future and a lot of employers don't want to have that risk, so they avoid hiring women after say 25. I'm not saying that you're sexist, I'm saying that as a society we're comfortable saying that people who have less deserve it for some reason and we have more for just reasons. If we accept that the society is unfair, and part of why we're better off than others is either luck of because the game is rigged (ie rich parents), we'll be more generous and fair. Apologies if I insulted people, I was trying to make a point for generosity and I got carried away.
      - rstupek 7y ago
        And as a society we need to understand that men are facing tons of difficulties women don't face too? Why are men killing themselves at a rate 4-5 times higher than women in the western world? Why is the life expectancy of a male always less than a female?
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
dleslie 7y ago
We've built civilization around the notion that escaping the natural order of things is desirable. I, for one, am happy to not be sleeping in shifts in order to stand guard against predation.
mgolawala 7y ago
Up until recently the natural human condition also involved going through the grief of losing at least one of your kids. https://ourworldindata.org/parents-losing-their-child https://ourworldindata.org/parents-losing-their-child The human condition evolves. Having said that, while I am supportive of UBI, I share your concerns over its impact on society. We do not understand the all what the knock on effects of such a program are. How it would be used/misused and how it would reshape incentives. We definitely need to dip our toe in the water before considering jumping in.
hooande 7y ago
No person who was born rich has to learn skills to avoid destitution. And poverty isn't the natural condition for humans any more than it is for cats, or any other animal.
- captainredbeard 7y ago
  Not true.
- tenpies 7y ago
  > No person who was born rich has to learn skills to avoid destitution. I can only speak for the Western tradition, but for most of history, the wealthy took great pride in making sure their male children were at least trained in soldiering, knew the family business, and were well-educated. It was the bare minimum to be considered a gentleman.
  - munk-a 7y ago
    And, if that child flubbed all those skills, then they'd skill live a comfortable and rich life, there just might not be much left for the next generation. Also, how is learning how to fence a good skill to avoid destitution? The rich had leisure time and invested that time in cultural skills, this isn't actually a bad thing either - it's my hope that everyone can afford to develop a hobby and be creative in their life... but that has nothing to do with avoiding destitution.
- easytiger 7y ago
  Yea sure. No one ever blew a fortune
  - mola 7y ago
    It's rare. How you are born pretty much sets your future in stone. Those rags to riches stories and vice versa are the outliers
    - easytiger 7y ago
MadWombat 7y ago
> People should fear being destitute its the natural human condition. People should die of diseases, its the natural human condition. Women should die in childbirth, its the natural human condition. Men should die in wars, its the natural human condition. People should be hunted by sabre-tooth tigers, its the natural human condition.
- sabarn01 7y ago
  Fear of failure is a useful social motivator. In rich societies that does't have to mean biological poverty. When I lived in a urban poor neighborhood I had one neighbor who drove a asphalt truck while the other was on benefits and drank on the porch all day. As an external observer there was little material difference in their standard of living.
mhalle 7y ago
There are countless socially beneficial personal activities that aren't centric around wealth. Start with a list of things people volunteer to do. Then add jobs like teaching, nursing, health care aides, and social work that positively impact the lives of many but in many places pay extremely little. People are called to these jobs for reasons outside of wealth. UBI allows these people to continue to serve the rest of society in a sustainable way.
sfkdjf9j3j 7y ago
Does that mean you would support a 100% inheritance tax and say, confiscating all of someone's wealth every few years?
- sabarn01 7y ago
  I think a true meritocracy is only possible using some type of agoge system, but that also violates human rights. When I say destitution I guess I mean to the acceptable minimum which that most people would find unacceptable.
- econcon 7y ago
  There will be workaround: You can't confiscate social capital or favours someone's parent did to someone as "young adult" then that young adult did it to these parents kid and barter continues.
cortesoft 7y ago
Dying young from curable diseases is also the natural human condition... should we not use antibiotics?
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
munk-a 7y ago
Sorry, can you clarify what lesson people who never were given a chance at an education should be learning? Maybe, instead of getting all social darwinist, we could actually take stock in the fact that we have enough that we can afford to share with those less well off than ourselves.

That's a common argument to justify inequality. If learning is the key, then why is there such a huge income disparity between men and women? Are women lazy and don't learn?

toolz 7y ago
What you're arguing for is equity, not equality. We already have equal opportunity. As for the gender wage gap, if women are so disadvantaged - exactly how do they make up 85% of consumer spending?
- nennes 7y ago
  How do we have equal opportunity? Can you point me towards evidence of this? I guess you're not arguing about the gender wage gap, as it's a well documented fact. What is the point you're trying to make?
  - rstupek 7y ago
    And yet not everyone can agree on what the cause of said gender wage gap truly is. Is it because women take time off to raise children, thus setting back their wage advancement? Is it because women are less likely to be more vigorous in asking for wage increases than men? Or is just because men are keeping women down?
    - munk-a 7y ago
      As an example... for my wife, her salary was depressed because her boss thought that I make good enough money that she doesn't really need it. I think a lot of women still receive extremely slanted peer reviews due to gender biases (she's really catty, while he tends to raise good arguments), relationship drama (I mean, she's a good worker, but she turned down a drink with me... I don't know how good her judgement is), straight up appearance judgements (Oh, don't give the raise to nancy, she'll have a cushy life with looks like that, barbara could use it more), and harassment (I don't know about that raise - hey what are you doing friday?). I think that everyone feels like we've totally solved gender discrimination forever while it's still really deeply seated in our culture.
  - toolz 7y ago
    What is the point, _you're_ trying to make? If you're trying to show women are financially burdened you can cherry-pick wage gap data to show that, sure, or you can take a more holistic view of society and what do you see? You see women with significantly more purchasing power than men. So are women disadvantaged or is there no incentive to be high earners? For me it's fairly obvious. There will be men and women who become high earners. There will be men and women who are overlooked based on gender. What I see with the wage gap can be fully explained by lack of necessity to earn for women. Think about that for a minute - they earn less than men, but they spend vastly more money than men. Exactly where is the incentive to earn more for women? Should they continue to work and earn more until they make up 90% of consumer spending? 95%? It's beyond me how anyone can claim a group that represents 85% of consumer spending is somehow financially burdened and suffers from inequality. It's almost unfathomable, but here we are.
- chickenpotpie 7y ago
  Dude, we are faaaaaaaaar from equal opportunity. One of the largest predictors of one's ability to accumulate wealth is still the wealth of their own parents. The U.S. is one of the countries with the highest link between parents' and a child's wealth.
  - bluGill 7y ago
    Citation needed. I hear this often, but no hard evidence that isn't easy to show is false.
    - Shacklz 7y ago
      > Citation needed. Here you go: "The fading American dream: Trends in absolute income mobility since 1940", Raj Chetty et al. https://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6336/398 https://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6336/398
    - denisw 7y ago
      I recommend „Capital in the 21st Century“ by Thomas Pikkety, an economist who has deeply studied wealth and income equality using historical data spanning three centuries. This book has all the evidence you need. https://www.amazon.com/-/de/dp/0674979850 https://www.amazon.com/-/de/dp/0674979850 Spoiler alert: income from wealth is on its way of becoming close to being as concentrated as it was in the 19th century (especially in the US), and the share of income from work in total national income is decreasing almost anywhere. So yes, increasingly you can only accrue significant wealth by already having significant wealth.
isoskeles 7y ago
Because you're using data that doesn't control for occupation, hours worked, etc.
- nennes 7y ago
  So as a gender, women choose lower paid jobs and work less? If this is true and it is a choice, that would mean that women as a gender are either lazy or less qualified. If this is not true then it is evidence of inequality in the selection of employees. I don't see either of the above making your point.
  - isoskeles 7y ago
    > lazy or less qualified No one is saying that, it's more of a strawman you want to use to, I'm not sure, maybe accuse people who disagree with you of sexism. Or could you explain why you use those words rather than assume we think it's, let's suppose, just a choice based on differences in average values men and women have?
    - nennes 7y ago
      My argument is that -as a society- we don't really accept that women are facing tons of difficulties that men don't experience, because of their sex. For example, sometimes it's because they might choose to have a baby in the future and a lot of employers don't want to have that risk, so they avoid hiring women after say 25. I'm not saying that you're sexist, I'm saying that as a society we're comfortable saying that people who have less deserve it for some reason and we have more for just reasons. If we accept that the society is unfair, and part of why we're better off than others is either luck of because the game is rigged (ie rich parents), we'll be more generous and fair. Apologies if I insulted people, I was trying to make a point for generosity and I got carried away.
    - rstupek 7y ago
      And as a society we need to understand that men are facing tons of difficulties women don't face too? Why are men killing themselves at a rate 4-5 times higher than women in the western world? Why is the life expectancy of a male always less than a female?
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

dleslie 7y ago

We've built civilization around the notion that escaping the natural order of things is desirable. I, for one, am happy to not be sleeping in shifts in order to stand guard against predation.

mgolawala 7y ago

Up until recently the natural human condition also involved going through the grief of losing at least one of your kids. https://ourworldindata.org/parents-losing-their-child https://ourworldindata.org/parents-losing-their-child The human condition evolves. Having said that, while I am supportive of UBI, I share your concerns over its impact on society. We do not understand the all what the knock on effects of such a program are. How it would be used/misused and how it would reshape incentives. We definitely need to dip our toe in the water before considering jumping in.

hooande 7y ago

No person who was born rich has to learn skills to avoid destitution. And poverty isn't the natural condition for humans any more than it is for cats, or any other animal.

captainredbeard 7y ago
Not true.
tenpies 7y ago
> No person who was born rich has to learn skills to avoid destitution. I can only speak for the Western tradition, but for most of history, the wealthy took great pride in making sure their male children were at least trained in soldiering, knew the family business, and were well-educated. It was the bare minimum to be considered a gentleman.
- munk-a 7y ago
  And, if that child flubbed all those skills, then they'd skill live a comfortable and rich life, there just might not be much left for the next generation. Also, how is learning how to fence a good skill to avoid destitution? The rich had leisure time and invested that time in cultural skills, this isn't actually a bad thing either - it's my hope that everyone can afford to develop a hobby and be creative in their life... but that has nothing to do with avoiding destitution.
easytiger 7y ago
Yea sure. No one ever blew a fortune
- mola 7y ago
  It's rare. How you are born pretty much sets your future in stone. Those rags to riches stories and vice versa are the outliers
  - easytiger 7y ago

MadWombat 7y ago

> People should fear being destitute its the natural human condition. People should die of diseases, its the natural human condition. Women should die in childbirth, its the natural human condition. Men should die in wars, its the natural human condition. People should be hunted by sabre-tooth tigers, its the natural human condition.

sabarn01 7y ago
Fear of failure is a useful social motivator. In rich societies that does't have to mean biological poverty. When I lived in a urban poor neighborhood I had one neighbor who drove a asphalt truck while the other was on benefits and drank on the porch all day. As an external observer there was little material difference in their standard of living.

mhalle 7y ago

There are countless socially beneficial personal activities that aren't centric around wealth. Start with a list of things people volunteer to do. Then add jobs like teaching, nursing, health care aides, and social work that positively impact the lives of many but in many places pay extremely little. People are called to these jobs for reasons outside of wealth. UBI allows these people to continue to serve the rest of society in a sustainable way.

sfkdjf9j3j 7y ago

Does that mean you would support a 100% inheritance tax and say, confiscating all of someone's wealth every few years?

sabarn01 7y ago
I think a true meritocracy is only possible using some type of agoge system, but that also violates human rights. When I say destitution I guess I mean to the acceptable minimum which that most people would find unacceptable.
econcon 7y ago
There will be workaround: You can't confiscate social capital or favours someone's parent did to someone as "young adult" then that young adult did it to these parents kid and barter continues.

cortesoft 7y ago

Dying young from curable diseases is also the natural human condition... should we not use antibiotics?

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

munk-a 7y ago

Sorry, can you clarify what lesson people who never were given a chance at an education should be learning? Maybe, instead of getting all social darwinist, we could actually take stock in the fact that we have enough that we can afford to share with those less well off than ourselves.