4 ms·

I really hate how the wealthy benefit from my washer, dryer, dishwasher, Internet, air conditioning, access to a huge variety of food... When will the wealthy s

I really hate how the wealthy benefit from my washer, dryer, dishwasher, Internet, air conditioning, access to a huge variety of food... When will the wealthy start passing the benefits of progress on to the rest of us? We've got big problems in our economy and income inequality is certainly one of them, but it's asinine to pretend that most individuals in society have not benefitted from technological progress.

nemothekid 3y ago
It's weird that in the face of growing evidence[1][2], people will still argue that it's "asinine" that a lot of people got the short end of the stick. Imagine we both went fishing and I took 80% of the fish and gave you 20%, when you turned around and asked for 50% if I said "look you were hungry yesterday and you clearly benefitted from 20% of the fish, why are you complaining" I assume you wouldn't just say "ok you're right". Even your list is out of touch; many of my friends in San Francisco don't have in-unit washer or dryers. Look I don't even think I'm even making a crazy observation; I'm just continuing the trend - as AI gets better and more pervasive it's only natural that wealth will concentrate without some force to redistribute it (either through wages or taxes). [1] https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ [2] https://wtfhappenedin1971.com https://wtfhappenedin1971.com
- satvikpendem 3y ago
  Your fishing example assumes a zero sum economy, when one of the first things you learn in economics classes is that the economy is not zero sum, that comparative advantages enable positive sum outcomes. A better example is, we go fishing, I catch fish, you chop wood, we build a fire with my wood and eat with your fish. We are both better off than we were before.
  - nemothekid 3y ago
    The metaphor is not the economy - it's about being told to shut up in the face on inequality. At the end of the day if I can't raise my concerns and negotiating, then I might as well be under a monarchy and we can erase all pretense about this being fair.
    - satvikpendem 3y ago
      Well, we're talking about the economy, which is where you implied the inequality. My point is that you're making it seem to the reader that you're conflating the two things, making it seem like you're implying that the fishing is about the economy. If you want to talk about shutting up in the face of inequality, pick a better example, or better yet, mention that you're not talking about the economy at all, even though that's the point of discussion here.
      - nemothekid 3y ago
        >mention that you're not talking about the economy at all, even though that's the point of discussion here. Are you implying there is no income equality today? I don't understand your contention with my point. It's more just asking me to ignore actual data and be happy with the fact that I can buy a flat screen TV for $200. It's seems natural that capital accumulates - and with AI this process is only going to get more concentrated; and looking backwards its clear we its only going to get worse.
        satvikpendem 3y ago
        Income inequality in what? The...economy, right? This is why I was confused, since you say your analogy is not about the economy, yet that's what we're talking about. Income inequality in the economy is present, yes, but economists are not in agreement whether it's a good or bad thing, and whether redistribution of wealth would even solve it [0]: > Despite the extensive existing literature on income inequality and economic growth, there remains considerable disagreement on the effect of inequality on economic growth. Existing literatures find either a positive or a negative relationship. In this paper, we attempt to theoretically examine that relationship with a stochastic optimal growth model. We make the disagreement clear within a single model. We conclude (i) that both are possible – that is, higher inequality can retard growth in the early stage of economic development, and can encourage growth in a near steady state, (ii) that income redistribution by high income tax does not always reduce income inequality. Income inequality can be reduced by higher income tax in a near steady state, but it cannot be reduced in the early stage of economic development, and (iii) that two government polices – rapid economic growth and low income inequality – can be achieved by low income tax in the early stage of economic development, but both cannot be achieved simultaneously in a near steady state. [0] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0264999312000466 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S02649... --- Now if you would like to submit literature on this topic, please do, as simply talking about what seems "natural" or "clear" does not really mean anything.
lanstin 3y ago
Different time scales. Except the internet these are all things that come in the last 100 years. Clearly average well being has increased in that time frame. Less clear if the last two decades have been advantageous for people in the US. I understand there are solid stats that the median person in the world and the bottom quartile, have improved. My kids have a vastly more fragile lifestyle then I did right out of college.

nemothekid 3y ago

It's weird that in the face of growing evidence[1][2], people will still argue that it's "asinine" that a lot of people got the short end of the stick. Imagine we both went fishing and I took 80% of the fish and gave you 20%, when you turned around and asked for 50% if I said "look you were hungry yesterday and you clearly benefitted from 20% of the fish, why are you complaining" I assume you wouldn't just say "ok you're right". Even your list is out of touch; many of my friends in San Francisco don't have in-unit washer or dryers. Look I don't even think I'm even making a crazy observation; I'm just continuing the trend - as AI gets better and more pervasive it's only natural that wealth will concentrate without some force to redistribute it (either through wages or taxes). [1] https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ [2] https://wtfhappenedin1971.com https://wtfhappenedin1971.com

satvikpendem 3y ago
Your fishing example assumes a zero sum economy, when one of the first things you learn in economics classes is that the economy is not zero sum, that comparative advantages enable positive sum outcomes. A better example is, we go fishing, I catch fish, you chop wood, we build a fire with my wood and eat with your fish. We are both better off than we were before.
- nemothekid 3y ago
  The metaphor is not the economy - it's about being told to shut up in the face on inequality. At the end of the day if I can't raise my concerns and negotiating, then I might as well be under a monarchy and we can erase all pretense about this being fair.
  - satvikpendem 3y ago
    Well, we're talking about the economy, which is where you implied the inequality. My point is that you're making it seem to the reader that you're conflating the two things, making it seem like you're implying that the fishing is about the economy. If you want to talk about shutting up in the face of inequality, pick a better example, or better yet, mention that you're not talking about the economy at all, even though that's the point of discussion here.
    - nemothekid 3y ago
      >mention that you're not talking about the economy at all, even though that's the point of discussion here. Are you implying there is no income equality today? I don't understand your contention with my point. It's more just asking me to ignore actual data and be happy with the fact that I can buy a flat screen TV for $200. It's seems natural that capital accumulates - and with AI this process is only going to get more concentrated; and looking backwards its clear we its only going to get worse.
      - satvikpendem 3y ago
        Income inequality in what? The...economy, right? This is why I was confused, since you say your analogy is not about the economy, yet that's what we're talking about. Income inequality in the economy is present, yes, but economists are not in agreement whether it's a good or bad thing, and whether redistribution of wealth would even solve it [0]: > Despite the extensive existing literature on income inequality and economic growth, there remains considerable disagreement on the effect of inequality on economic growth. Existing literatures find either a positive or a negative relationship. In this paper, we attempt to theoretically examine that relationship with a stochastic optimal growth model. We make the disagreement clear within a single model. We conclude (i) that both are possible – that is, higher inequality can retard growth in the early stage of economic development, and can encourage growth in a near steady state, (ii) that income redistribution by high income tax does not always reduce income inequality. Income inequality can be reduced by higher income tax in a near steady state, but it cannot be reduced in the early stage of economic development, and (iii) that two government polices – rapid economic growth and low income inequality – can be achieved by low income tax in the early stage of economic development, but both cannot be achieved simultaneously in a near steady state. [0] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0264999312000466 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S02649... --- Now if you would like to submit literature on this topic, please do, as simply talking about what seems "natural" or "clear" does not really mean anything.

lanstin 3y ago

Different time scales. Except the internet these are all things that come in the last 100 years. Clearly average well being has increased in that time frame. Less clear if the last two decades have been advantageous for people in the US. I understand there are solid stats that the median person in the world and the bottom quartile, have improved. My kids have a vastly more fragile lifestyle then I did right out of college.