On: US Income Inequality: All for the Top 1%

[dsacco]

But the economy is not zero sum, like that bag. If I have a process that increases the total number of skittles in the bag, is it still unfair for me to take more skittles from it?

[mattmanser → dsacco]

Depends on your view point.

You could argue that the process was never really "yours" in the first place.

Society, our laws, our armies and natural resources, our roads, bridges, power lines, telecoms structure, are 99% of that process and you added 1%.

You simply took advantage of a lot of luck, a little bit of hard work and probably a bunch of your parents' money to end up owning it.

Maybe you should get a chunk of the rewards, but all of it?

[dsacco → mattmanser]

How would you propose we make a more meritocratic system that doesn't allow for as much luck-based success?

[TheAdamAndChe → dsacco]

Tax the wealthy and use that money to invest in infrastructure, education, and economic growth across the entire country, not just the big cities. Combine that with limiting trade with countries that have abysmal minimum wages and standard of living, and you'd have a fantastic recipe for economic growth for the lower and middle classes.

Luck is always involved, but by increasing opportunities while giving workers more leverage, it is definitely doable.

[AstralStorm → dsacco]

I suppose you want some incorruptible and relatively unbiased jury to manage it as well?

[mcguire → dsacco]

If you end up with a mountain of skittles that you can use to crush anyone who irritates you while everyone else is eating all the skittles they get in order to survive, then yes, that might be a problem.

[dsacco → mcguire]

But does this actually describe the current state of affairs? If not, how would we get there? That seems like a cognitive jump from people taking unequal amounts of skittles.

[mcguire → dsacco]

I dunno. How do you feel about the political power wielded by the wealthy? Too much? Not enough? What would it take to be too much?

[dvdhnt → dsacco]

So, you're right - the economy is not zero sum, but the resources are. The economy is about moving them here or there.

It depends on where you got those skittles? If you are increasing the skittle count by just taking from other peoples' bags of skittles then you're literally the mortgage/banking industry and there are probably lots of empty skittle bags out there propping up our never-ending-skittle-bag.

[dsacco → dvdhnt]

Is it a problem for me to do what you say if the skittles themselves become effectively cheaper for everyone else to enjoy? What if systemic issues only happen every 10 years? Or 5 years?