That would mean banning inheritance and standardizing child-rearing or at expenses. Yes, the latter is a leftist boogieman. But the non-ergodicity of wealth is

That would mean banning inheritance and standardizing child-rearing or at expenses. Yes, the latter is a leftist boogieman. But the non-ergodicity of wealth is really scary! We got along fine pre agriculture (little wealth differences), and then with wars and famines to reset, but surely we banning private school is better than more of those?! Keep in mind non-ergodicity is also good. Socialized infrastructure like public transit for example: - The risk / lack of extractive fees to make profitability makes it impossible to do well privately - The benefits of pooled risk apply to even the richest people, who might with conventional econ think they are stuck at best with a noblesse oblige. Agricultural, colonialism, and industrialization are massive qualitative shifts that non-ergodic models also do better justice.