3 ms·
I didn't understand this part: "If you want to reduce economic inequality instead of just improving the overall standard of living, it's not enough just to rai
by billybob 18y ago
I didn't understand this part:
"If you want to reduce economic inequality instead of just improving the overall standard of living, it's not enough just to raise up the poor. What if one of your newly minted engineers gets ambitious and goes on to become another Bill Gates? Economic inequality will be as bad as ever."
What about your newly minted teachers and other middle-class citizens? Does everyone who rise from poverty become super rich?
I don't understand economics well, so I can't really counter his overall argument, but this seemed a little offhanded.
- nazgulnarsil 18y agopart of the point is that these "super rich" that everyone likes to point fingers at are such statistical outliers that formulating economic policy around them is ridiculous. In essence you wind up with special rules for .01% of the population. How egalitarian is that?
- AlisdairO 18y agoWhy so ridiculous? Those .01% often have a vastly disproportionate impact on the rest of the society, so it only makes sense to have special rules for them.
- nazgulnarsil 18y agothe point is that it's hypocritical from the egalitarian soapbox that the people stand on.
- AlisdairO 18y agoNot really. The .01% generally have vastly greater power and effective rights within society - ensuring that that doesn't go overboard isn't so crazy.
- pg 18y agoWhat I meant was that you can't assume that making the poor richer will decrease inequality, because many measures that make the poor richer also make the rich richer, so the gap between them remains just as big.