7 ms·

> If you look out the window of your car (or house) and see homeless people (or mobs) - that isn't inequality. I don't understand your reasoning. If some peopl

> If you look out the window of your car (or house) and see homeless people (or mobs) - that isn't inequality. I don't understand your reasoning. If some people are homeless while others have houses, how is that not inequality? I've lived in São Paulo, where homeless people can be found on literally every street, while millionaires fly from skyscraper to skyscraper in their private helicopters to avoid the impassable traffic. No-one needs to pore over dry statistics to know that Brazil (to take just one example) has enormous levels of inequality.

goliatone 6y ago
I had the impression that the main reason wealthier people in São Paulo use helicopters is to keep their ears in place[1], avoiding traffic jams sure might be a nice plus. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/13/world/sao-paulo-becomes-the-kidnapping-capital-of-brazil.html https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/13/world/sao-paulo-becomes-t...
- hackissimo123 6y ago
  That too. And it illustrates another reason why extreme inequality is bad: even if you're a total psychopath with no concern for anyone except yourself, it's not in your interest to live in a society with extreme inequality - unless you like the idea of being surrounded by people who have so little compared to you that they're desperate for what you have, and are willing to use violence to get it.
roenxi 6y ago
If you go out and measure 'inequality', it isn't a measure of homeless vs middle class, it is a measure of homeless vs mega-wealthy. That is a stupid comparison IMO - the gap between the poor and mega-wealthy doesn't matter as much as the actual conditions of the poor. The homeless vs middle class inequality could easily be much the same as it always has been. The middle class are getting increasingly tenuous in their wealth.
- jessaustin 6y ago
  The rich are glad that you believe this, and they wish all of us were so foolish. Focusing all of our attention on the poor is what they want us to do. Meanwhile we'll be ignoring the people whose lobbyists have destroyed our society...
- itronitron 6y ago
  >> the gap between the poor and mega-wealthy doesn't matter as much as the actual conditions of the poor. I expect that when most people talk about the gap they are referring specifically to the actual conditions of the poor, and not the range of the gap.
  - roenxi 6y ago
    Then they don't mean inequality. That is talking about a living standards. Inequality problems can be very effectively by taking stuff away from the wealthy. That doesn't work for a living standards problem because there isn't enough real stuff for it to work. Look at the real amount of resources consumed by the mega wealthy and divide it by the number of poor people - the results aren't very impressive. Not the paper wealth, but real consumption. Jeff Bezos for example may make billions on paper, but his actual personal consumption isn't going to be anywhere near that amount in goods and services. Distribute his real consumption to the poor in New York and it won't make much of a difference, especially over the long term. But absolute inequality would noticeably drop. The poor would appreciate it, but it isn't going to solve systemic living standards problems.

goliatone 6y ago

I had the impression that the main reason wealthier people in São Paulo use helicopters is to keep their ears in place[1], avoiding traffic jams sure might be a nice plus. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/13/world/sao-paulo-becomes-the-kidnapping-capital-of-brazil.html https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/13/world/sao-paulo-becomes-t...

hackissimo123 6y ago
That too. And it illustrates another reason why extreme inequality is bad: even if you're a total psychopath with no concern for anyone except yourself, it's not in your interest to live in a society with extreme inequality - unless you like the idea of being surrounded by people who have so little compared to you that they're desperate for what you have, and are willing to use violence to get it.

roenxi 6y ago

If you go out and measure 'inequality', it isn't a measure of homeless vs middle class, it is a measure of homeless vs mega-wealthy. That is a stupid comparison IMO - the gap between the poor and mega-wealthy doesn't matter as much as the actual conditions of the poor. The homeless vs middle class inequality could easily be much the same as it always has been. The middle class are getting increasingly tenuous in their wealth.

jessaustin 6y ago
The rich are glad that you believe this, and they wish all of us were so foolish. Focusing all of our attention on the poor is what they want us to do. Meanwhile we'll be ignoring the people whose lobbyists have destroyed our society...
itronitron 6y ago
>> the gap between the poor and mega-wealthy doesn't matter as much as the actual conditions of the poor. I expect that when most people talk about the gap they are referring specifically to the actual conditions of the poor, and not the range of the gap.
- roenxi 6y ago
  Then they don't mean inequality. That is talking about a living standards. Inequality problems can be very effectively by taking stuff away from the wealthy. That doesn't work for a living standards problem because there isn't enough real stuff for it to work. Look at the real amount of resources consumed by the mega wealthy and divide it by the number of poor people - the results aren't very impressive. Not the paper wealth, but real consumption. Jeff Bezos for example may make billions on paper, but his actual personal consumption isn't going to be anywhere near that amount in goods and services. Distribute his real consumption to the poor in New York and it won't make much of a difference, especially over the long term. But absolute inequality would noticeably drop. The poor would appreciate it, but it isn't going to solve systemic living standards problems.