4 ms·

The only reason why it isn't zero sum is because we get access to more resources, and this leads de facto to more money in the pool (money <--> resources) right

by flawn 4y ago

The only reason why it isn't zero sum is because we get access to more resources, and this leads de facto to more money in the pool (money <--> resources) right? If we assume the best case that these new resources are distributed equally and not depending on wealth, then the Yard Model still holds in place as we talk about relative percentages.

gabesullice 4y ago
No, because new resources don't materialize like manna from heaven. Someone, somewhere needs to reorganize resources in a more efficient way or discover new ones. If you benefit "equally" from that change in dynamics to the person who actually catalyzed the change, then there would be less incentive to catalyze it in the first place. It may happen from time to time because people are curious and benevolent. But, in general, if catalyzing that change has a cost, then the society depends on some people sacrificing their own good for everyone else's. In other words, the benefactor will have paid to catalyze it, but they'll only get an "equal" share of the gains to the people who sacrificed nothing. I think you probably don't mean "equally" though. You probably mean "fairly". And it's probably true that "sacrificing" 20% of a billion dollars is a lot different than 20% of ten thousand dollars. But rates of return do tend to decrease at scale, maybe not enough? Personally, I think taking from the catalyzers isn't optimal. It's also petty to worry that they benefitted "too much" from their actions. If we must tax, tax land and consumption. I haven't thought it through, but maybe a 100% estate tax, minus some reasonably capped life insurance for spouses and dependents, would reduce some of the feelings of unfairness that people experience.
- jakupovic 4y ago
  >No, because new resources don't materialize like manna from heaven. No, you're wrong. Me finding gold or pretty much anything of value does mean that it did materilize from heaven. Many more examples...
  - gabesullice 4y ago
    Gold very rarely falls on your head while you're reclining on the sofa.
HPsquared 4y ago
Not even that, simple bartering increases value by distributing items away from the people who don't want them, to the people who do. Value is subjective. If we each start with one red and one blue pen, but I prefer red pens and you prefer blue, we (voluntarily) trade the pens and each have two of our favourite colour. Net gain!

by flawn 4y ago

gabesullice 4y ago

No, because new resources don't materialize like manna from heaven. Someone, somewhere needs to reorganize resources in a more efficient way or discover new ones. If you benefit "equally" from that change in dynamics to the person who actually catalyzed the change, then there would be less incentive to catalyze it in the first place. It may happen from time to time because people are curious and benevolent. But, in general, if catalyzing that change has a cost, then the society depends on some people sacrificing their own good for everyone else's. In other words, the benefactor will have paid to catalyze it, but they'll only get an "equal" share of the gains to the people who sacrificed nothing. I think you probably don't mean "equally" though. You probably mean "fairly". And it's probably true that "sacrificing" 20% of a billion dollars is a lot different than 20% of ten thousand dollars. But rates of return do tend to decrease at scale, maybe not enough? Personally, I think taking from the catalyzers isn't optimal. It's also petty to worry that they benefitted "too much" from their actions. If we must tax, tax land and consumption. I haven't thought it through, but maybe a 100% estate tax, minus some reasonably capped life insurance for spouses and dependents, would reduce some of the feelings of unfairness that people experience.

jakupovic 4y ago
>No, because new resources don't materialize like manna from heaven. No, you're wrong. Me finding gold or pretty much anything of value does mean that it did materilize from heaven. Many more examples...
- gabesullice 4y ago
  Gold very rarely falls on your head while you're reclining on the sofa.

HPsquared 4y ago

Not even that, simple bartering increases value by distributing items away from the people who don't want them, to the people who do. Value is subjective. If we each start with one red and one blue pen, but I prefer red pens and you prefer blue, we (voluntarily) trade the pens and each have two of our favourite colour. Net gain!