Income inequality..... a good thing?

[brenthutch 444]

Fairly earned income/wealth inequality is the greatest nonviolent driver of human progress, full stop.  

[JerryBaumchen 1,364]

2 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Fairly earned income/wealth inequality is the greatest nonviolent driver of human progress, full stop.  

Hi Brent,

Sorry, but I have to go with curiosity.

We will have to agree to disagree.

Jerry Baumchen

[brenthutch 444]

The seed of imagination must be fertilized with the unsavory manure of capitalism to bear fruit.

[billvon 2,996]

18 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Fairly earned income/wealth inequality is the greatest nonviolent driver of human progress, full stop.  

History doesn't seem to agree with you.  Our most remarkable achievement to date - manned exploration of the moon - was driven by national pride, performed by a socialist organization and directed and crewed by people paid government wages.

[brenthutch 444]

The space race was a proxy war with the Soviets.  There was a reason we stopped after it was apparent we had won.  Oh BTW we did that by leveraging WWII technology taken from the Nazis.  Does Werner von Braun ring a bell?

Edited March 27, 2019 by brenthutch

[brenthutch 444]

10 minutes ago, billvon said:

History doesn't seem to agree with you.  Our most remarkable achievement to date - manned exploration of the moon - was driven by national pride, performed by a socialist organization and directed and crewed by people paid government wages.

Cell phones have had a greater impact on the lives of people than the Apollo program.   Without the wealthy we never would have had them.  Think about that the next time you tool about in your Tesla.

Edited March 27, 2019 by brenthutch

[billvon 2,996]

34 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Cell phones have had a greater impact on the lives of people than the Apollo program.   Without the wealthy we never would have had them.  Think about that the next time you tool about in your Tesla.

So you think Hedy Lamarr invented CDMA because she hoped to get rich from it?

Quote

The space race was a proxy war with the Soviets.  There was a reason we stopped after it was apparent we had won.

And the Soviets (COMMUNISTS!) won at first - first satellite, first man in orbit.  Sorta blows the capitalism meme out of the water.

Quote

 Oh BTW we did that by leveraging WWII technology taken from the Nazis.  Does Werner von Braun ring a bell?

Yep.  Another guy getting paid a government salary by the US - who never got rich off his work.

So another good example of how the desire to get richer did not play a role in the space program.

[brenthutch 444]

1 minute ago, billvon said:

So you think Hedy Lamarr invented CDMA because she hoped to get rich from it?

And the Soviets (COMMUNISTS!) won at first - first satellite, first man in orbit.  Sorta blows the capitalism meme out of the water.

Yep.  Another guy getting paid a government salary by the US - who never got rich off his work.

So another good example of how the desire to get richer did not play a role in the space program.

Yes Bill the Soviets won the first few rounds of the space race, again using Nazi technology from WWII, just as we won the subsequent rounds and ultimately the war in the space race.  You must have missed the "nonviolent" caveat of my initial post.

[jakee 1,497]

6 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Fairly earned income/wealth inequality is the greatest nonviolent driver of human progress, full stop.  

Simple one sentence statements are always good at accurately representing how the world works.

[brenthutch 444]

3 hours ago, jakee said:

Simple one sentence statements are always good at accurately representing how the world works.

I never opined on "how the world works".  I'm just pushing back on the negative meme of income inequality.  Without the wealthy we would not have cell phones.  Think about that for a moment.  

[billvon 2,996]

9 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Yes Bill the Soviets won the first few rounds of the space race, again using Nazi technology from WWII, just as we won the subsequent rounds and ultimately the war in the space race.  You must have missed the "nonviolent" caveat of my initial post.

We got almost all that Nazi technology (google Operation Paperclip.)  But in any case, that represented merely a starting point.  The vast majority of work was done by US government workers, almost none of whom were doing it to "make it into the top 1%"  or wanting to increase the income divide.

I have nothing against people working hard and getting rich.  I have a big problem with the growing divide between poor and rich, a divide which is becoming more and more impossible to cross every year.  That leads to a divided, two-class society, and that's not good for anyone.

 

[kallend 2,027]

10 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Fairly earned income/wealth inequality is the greatest nonviolent driver of human progress, full stop.  

Define "FAIRLY" and "EARNED".  How does inherited wealth fit into this scheme?  How about using bankruptcies to funnel investors' wealth into your own pockets?

[gowlerk 2,198]

3 minutes ago, kallend said:

Define "FAIRLY" and "EARNED".  How does inherited wealth fit into this scheme?  How about using bankruptcies to funnel investors' wealth into your own pockets?

Capitalism and Darwinism/evolution and survival of the fittest have a lot in common. As social animals we need to both use it to our advantage and to control for unwanted effects. One of the ways most societies do this is by spreading some of the wealth around. If we don’t do this a collapse will happen and the 1% will not be able to thrive either. A whole different group of people would survive but live poorer lives. 

 

 

[kallend 2,027]

43 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

I never opined on "how the world works".  I'm just pushing back on the negative meme of income inequality.  Without the wealthy we would not have cell phones.  Think about that for a moment.  

Is there a limit, in your mind, to the extent of inequality?  When, say, an investor makes more money in a minute than her full time employee makes in a year, and then pays a lower tax rate on it too?

[brenthutch 444]

31 minutes ago, kallend said:

Define "FAIRLY" and "EARNED".  How does inherited wealth fit into this scheme?  How about using bankruptcies to funnel investors' wealth into your own pockets?

That doesn't sound very fair.

[brenthutch 444]

Look guys, I am just saying income inequality is not some horrible problem, in fact it is a major driver of progress.  Nearly all of the modern conveniences we enjoy today were once the exclusive domain of the wealthy.  I remember watching the TV show Dallas back in the 80s and a blonde by the pool bragged about her new "cellular phone" or walking into a high end audio/video store in the 90s and seeing my first HDTV, price tag $20,000.  The wealthy create a market for cutting edge luxuries that ten years on are enjoyed by society at large.  

[wmw999 2,452]

There was a whole lot of human progress before the formalization of capitalism. Back when actual survival (as opposed to social and/or economic survival) was at stake, there were advantages to cooperation, as it increased the strength of the community. So while in the last 200 years the majority of what the OP might recognize as progress might have been due to capitalism (or at least tortured into being due to it), I'd say that actually money is simply a proxy for actual power and survival.

If people can move past capitalism, and go back to the original mission statement of survival, and maybe even redefine survival beyond "my family is more comfortable than yours," we can get back to, if not as fast a technological progress, maybe a society with more peace and contentment at all levels. Would that be a good thing?

Is it more important to look at the overall happiness/satisfaction/success of a population or the peak achievable by a single member? 

Wendy P.

[airdvr 210]

One need only spend some time in Mountain View, CA and see the old RVs lining the city parks because the people needed to run the service businesses can't afford to live anywhere nearby.  The divide has turned to a chasm.

[brenthutch 444]

51 minutes ago, airdvr said:

One need only spend some time in Mountain View, CA and see the old RVs lining the city parks because the people needed to run the service businesses can't afford to live anywhere nearby.  The divide has turned to a chasm.

It sounds like California needs to vote in some Democrats and implement some progressive policies.

[BillyVance 34]

2 hours ago, kallend said:

Define "FAIRLY" and "EARNED".  How does inherited wealth fit into this scheme?  How about using bankruptcies to funnel investors' wealth into your own pockets?

I'd like to see you explain how Bernie Sanders never held a job in his life besides public office, and how he and his wife have millions of dollars and THREE homes. BUT SOCIALISM!!!!

Socialism is a sham. The rulers don't give a shit about the people once they get into power.

[jakee 1,497]

2 hours ago, brenthutch said:

I never opined on "how the world works".  I'm just pushing back on the negative meme of income inequality.  

Don’t lie. What’s the point?

 

You made a positive statement about how the world works, full stop.

[brenthutch 444]

Just now, jakee said:

Don’t lie. What’s the point?

 

You made a positive statement about how the world works, full stop.

Read my earlier comments, I think I made it quite clear.

[jakee 1,497]

10 minutes ago, BillyVance said:

I'd like to see you explain how Bernie Sanders never held a job in his life besides public office, and how he and his wife have millions of dollars and THREE homes. BUT SOCIALISM!!!!

I’ll explain it by pointing out that you’re lying. Bernie Sanders held his first elected office in his 40th year, and (obviously) had several jobs before that. His wife also has her own career.

[jakee 1,497]

4 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Read my earlier comments, I think I made it quite clear.

Exactly, so why are you now lying about it? 

 

Honestly, I don’t understand the mentality. You know what your OP said, you know that I and everyone  else know what your OP said, so why lie about what it said? What’s the point?

[billvon 2,996]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

Look guys, I am just saying income inequality is not some horrible problem, in fact it is a major driver of progress.

Income inequality is a problem when it results in a two-caste society, where the top has all the power, and there's no effective way to move from the bottom to the top.  It results in societal discord and division.  It is not a major driver of progress.  

Income inequality when it does NOT result in a two-caste society isn't as much of a problem.  Think of the 1950's, when a CEO might live on the same block as his employees, and make only twice as much.

Quote

Nearly all of the modern conveniences we enjoy today were once the exclusive domain of the wealthy.

You are talking about two different things - how newly introduced technologies are expensive (which they are) vs an income inequity causing those things to be introduced (it does not.)  Cars were once the province of the very rich.  This was not because income inequity drove them to be introduced; this was because they were expensive.  In fact, it was not until Ford started mass producing cars specifically to sell to poor people - AND started employing said poor people and paying them wages that allowed them to buy such cars - that they moved into the mainstream.  His effort to REDUCE income inequality led to widespread adoption of the car.

So the next time you drive your car, remember that the reason you can do so was that a manufacturer FOUGHT income inequality to get them out to people in the first place.