3 ms·

But that's not how any of it works to begin with. Inequality isn't caused because people produce proportionally more or less. The very wealthy generally own pro

But that's not how any of it works to begin with. Inequality isn't caused because people produce proportionally more or less. The very wealthy generally own property that has appreciated in value, or have inherited it. Among working people, the differences fundamentally come from labor markets, not our productivity. An engineer might make more or less than someone else on their team, but they both make multitudes more than the people assembling beams for an apartment building. You should totally enjoy the freedom to be a productive member of society, that's not where inequality originates.

AnimalMuppet 6y ago
> An engineer might make more or less than someone else on their team, but they both make multitudes more than the people assembling beams for an apartment building. That is, an engineer produces more of what society values than an assembler does. And why does society value it more? Scarcity. More people can assemble beams than can do solid engineering. You can say that society isn't valuing the right things. That might be a defensible position. But in general, attempts to "fix" that problem run into the problem that the fixers don't know enough. The results are sub-optimal - not just theoretically, but in very concrete ways. But even if you put everyone on roughly equivalent wages... the people who enter YC aren't doing it because the wages are higher. They're trying, with a very small number of people, to build something useful to many people. That's productivity. Why do they do it? Somewhat because they believe in what they're trying to do, but also because they see it as a chance to make a lot of money. They're not doing it by owning property. They're not inheriting it. They're making it by building something. Now, are you going to let them become inequal? Or not?

AnimalMuppet 6y ago

> An engineer might make more or less than someone else on their team, but they both make multitudes more than the people assembling beams for an apartment building. That is, an engineer produces more of what society values than an assembler does. And why does society value it more? Scarcity. More people can assemble beams than can do solid engineering. You can say that society isn't valuing the right things. That might be a defensible position. But in general, attempts to "fix" that problem run into the problem that the fixers don't know enough. The results are sub-optimal - not just theoretically, but in very concrete ways. But even if you put everyone on roughly equivalent wages... the people who enter YC aren't doing it because the wages are higher. They're trying, with a very small number of people, to build something useful to many people. That's productivity. Why do they do it? Somewhat because they believe in what they're trying to do, but also because they see it as a chance to make a lot of money. They're not doing it by owning property. They're not inheriting it. They're making it by building something. Now, are you going to let them become inequal? Or not?