3 ms·
This completely ignores fact that "be better off" also includes control of one's environment (also called freedom). Considering that, in your example, most peop
by asgard1024 12y ago
This completely ignores fact that "be better off" also includes control of one's environment (also called freedom). Considering that, in your example, most people would be worse off. They would all have higher material standards, but if you consider amount of wealth equal to "voting rights" about their environment, then they got a cut.
To say this less abstractly: Rich and poor are not a separate phenomena. Most people who are rich are so because they have power which they exercise over the poor.
- zo1 12y ago"Most people who are rich are so because they have power which they exercise over the poor." Define "power"? What does it mean to you? More so, what do you mean when you claim that the rich exercise power over the poor?
- rthomas6 12y agoLike I said, that much wealth inequality is not ideal. I just think that considering what maximizes the mean/median of world prosperity is as important, if not somewhat more important, than considering how wide the standard deviation of wealth distribution is. We should consider both things.