Wealth Inequality

[Friend of Mara]

Any wealth inequality pales compared to the envy inequality. A person’s envy does them more harm than someone else’s wealth.

How many people starve to death because of envy each year? How many people go into debt because of envy each year? How many people don't go to the doctor each year because they are just soooo envious? This is a silly notion. You have to know that.

 

[Friend of Mara]

It's not justified.

Quite some time ago, I started a thread called "A Challenge to Capitalists," in which I challenged people who are pro-capitalist to prove mathematically (showing their work) that CEOs and other super-rich individuals actually deserve their wealth and that they have proven value to society at large. You can imagine what debacle that was, as the mealy-mouthed capitalists tried in vain to find ways to avoid answering the question directly.

Its never a logical argument. Its a worldview argument. Its a moral argument surprisingly. The only justification is "because thats the way the world should work". Their framework for how the world works has been molded in such a way that criticism of wealth hoarding is in some way the fault of those making the criticism.

If a poor person makes the argument they want free stuff.
If a middle class person makes the argument they are just envious that they aren't as successful.
If an upper class person makes the argument they are a hypocrite.

 

[Valjean]

Historically, wealth inequality is destabilizing. It leads to depressions and revolutions.

The Historical Effects of Wealth Inequality - Fact / Myth

 

[Stevicus]

How am I being cheated? I haven't been robbed by any billionaire.

Are you sure? I mean, I don't know you, so for all I know, you could be Jeff Bezos posting in disguise.

 

[icehorse]

Bezos' billions have no affect on my wealth or my ability to make money. I've no idea why people have to spend so much time worrying about what the other guy has got.

His wealth has been amassed at the expense of our education system, our infrastructure, the well being of countless of his employees, and on and on.

Yours is a selfish perspective.

 

[Shaul]

How many people starve to death because of envy each year? How many people go into debt because of envy each year? How many people don't go to the doctor each year because they are just soooo envious? This is a silly notion. You have to know that.

Plenty. They starve themselves in ways that are sometimes less visible. They starve their spirits with venom. They go into debt to envy and strife instead of investing in themselves to their betterment. They wreck their health with stress to “keep up with the Jones”, ruin their mental health, and abuse substances because they don’t live up to some delusional fantasies of how good the “rich” have it. And it is a great irony that the “rich” are just other people like themselves. Some are happy, some are not. How many of the rich commit suicide? Some have good health, others no. The honest truth is besides the finances there is no difference between the rich and poor. We are all human.

Money is fleeting and ultimately inconsequential. You can’t take it with you. Only that which is done to improve your soul and to help others lasts. People that spend their time in envy need to refocus and get their “eye on the prize”.

 

[Friend of Mara]

Plenty. They starve themselves in ways that are sometimes less visible. They starve their spirits with venom. They go into debt to envy and strife instead of investing in themselves to their betterment. They wreck their health with stress to “keep up with the Jones”, ruin their mental health, and abuse substances because they don’t live up to some delusional fantasies of how good the “rich” have it. And it is a great irony that the “rich” are just other people like themselves. Some are happy, some are not. How many of the rich commit suicide? Some have good health, others no. The honest truth is besides the finances there is no difference between the rich and poor. We are all human.

Money is fleeting and ultimately inconsequential. You can’t take it with you. Only that which is done to improve your soul and to help others lasts. People that spend their time in envy need to refocus and get their “eye on the prize”.

Is this the same conversation as before? Sure there are people that have a missing piece somewhere in them where needs aren't met and won't be filled with wealth or "stuff". But do you think that the struggles of people economically are somehow explained by simple "envy"? I just want that point clarified before I make my point. And as another follow-up question do you think that people are poor purely because of their merit?

 

[Shaul]

That's incorrect. A competition has by definition and necessity at least one loser. The loser doesn't benefit from the competition.

That’s not true and displays a massive misunderstanding of how free markets work. The “winner” and “losers” in the market aren’t binary qualities. They are qualitative degrees. Some win more, some win less. But all participants win.

 

[Shaul]

Is this the same conversation as before? Sure there are people that have a missing piece somewhere in them where needs aren't met and won't be filled with wealth or "stuff". But do you think that the struggles of people economically are somehow explained by simple "envy"? I just want that point clarified before I make my point. And as another follow-up question do you think that people are poor purely because of their merit?

Of course it doesn’t explain all of them. I never said anything like that. What I have written is that envy (unless sublimated into something positive) is deleterious. And it is.

 

[epronovost]

That’s not true and displays a massive misunderstanding of how free markets work. The “winner” and “losers” in the market aren’t binary qualities. They are qualitative degrees. Some win more, some win less. But all participants win.

That's a very severe dream you have there. Bankrupt people who lose their home and their sources of income aren't lesser winners. They are clear losers. People who can salvage a starvation wage aren't lesser winner either. They are losers.

 

[Stevicus]

Its never a logical argument. Its a worldview argument. Its a moral argument surprisingly. The only justification is "because thats the way the world should work". Their framework for how the world works has been molded in such a way that criticism of wealth hoarding is in some way the fault of those making the criticism.

Whenever people say "that's the way the world should work," I see that as an appeal to natural law. Survival of the fittest. When people advocate for a philosophy along those lines, it's a case of "Be careful what you wish for, you may get it."

I don't see it as the fault of the person making the criticism. People can observe and criticize anything they want, as long as there remains the right to free speech. Even if that right didn't exist, people would still find ways to question and challenge "the way the world works," as they have done all throughout history.

If a poor person makes the argument they want free stuff.
If a middle class person makes the argument they are just envious that they aren't as successful.
If an upper class person makes the argument they are a hypocrite.

I think the poor just want to have a fair chance in the so-called "land of opportunity."

The lower middle class (sometimes called the working class) only wants a fair wage for a fair day's work. Low wages combined with high prices can make people somewhat restless and cranky over the long term.

The upper middle class is in somewhat better shape, although they're more driven to try to keep and protect what they have. I don't know that they're "envious" of the wealthy class, although they might feel more vulnerable to political instability or social upheaval.

There are some in the wealthy class who might support liberal social programs and greater equity in society, possibly as a way of hedging their bets. That's the course America took in the last century, as the labor movement and other reforms were becoming more popular. The wealthy classes (some of them, anyway) realized that they'd be better off giving better wages and working conditions to workers.

 

[Friend of Mara]

Of course it doesn’t explain all of them. I never said anything like that. What I have written is that envy (unless sublimated into something positive) is deleterious. And it is.

Sure. Do you think that people who are upset at wealth inequality today are motivated primarily with envy?

Do you feel that greed has the same corrosive effect?

 

[Viker]

Hey, if anyone ever shoots for a tethered pay scale......


We could discuss it over a few vodkas at Putin's place!

Stoli?

 

[epronovost]

The lower middle class (sometimes called the working class) only wants a fair wage for a fair day's work. Low wages combined with high prices can make people somewhat restless and cranky over the long term.

The upper middle class is in somewhat better shape, although they're more driven to try to keep and protect what they have. I don't know that they're "envious" of the wealthy class, although they might feel more vulnerable to political instability or social upheaval.

There are some in the wealthy class who might support liberal social programs and greater equity in society, possibly as a way of hedging their bets. That's the course America took in the last century, as the labor movement and other reforms were becoming more popular. The wealthy classes (some of them, anyway) realized that they'd be better off giving better wages and working conditions to workers.

There are also more than social classes as identities upon which a person can build a worldview and politics. A wealthy women for example could feel a kinship with all women in her society due to her gender and how her gender has shaped her personal and social identity and thus would push for politics that don't benefit her directly like paid family leave, but that would benefit women as a class for example.

 

[Friend of Mara]

There are also more than social classes as identities upon which a person can build a worldview and politics. A wealthy women for example could feel a kinship with all women in her society due to her gender and how her gender has shaped her personal and social identity and thus would push for politics that don't benefit her directly like paid family leave, but that would benefit women as a class for example.

That is a poor example but the meaning comes through. But it still doesn't mean that upper economic brackets routinely support their fiscal identity over others.

 

[epronovost]

That is a poor example but the meaning comes through. But it still doesn't mean that upper economic brackets routinely support their fiscal identity over others.

generally not indeed. Social class is usually considered a very powerful identity too.

 

[Friend of Mara]

generally not indeed. Social class is usually considered a very powerful identity too.

Can you rephrase this?

 

[epronovost]

Can you rephrase this?

Generally people of high social class do not vote or support the financial and fiscal interests of people of lower classes. Most people votes and politics are self-interested (not that there is anything particularly wrong with that in most cases).

Social classes, are important in social identities since they are almost systematically represented in politics (Labor vs Tory party for example) which isn't always the case for other types of social identities.

Is that clearer?

 

[Friend of Mara]

Generally people of high social class do not vote or support the financial and fiscal interests of people of lower classes. Most people votes and politics are self-interested (not that there is anything particularly wrong with that in most cases).

Social classes, are important in social identities since they are almost systematically represented in politics (Labor vs Tory party for example) which isn't always the case for other types of social identities.

Is that clearer?

Yes. And I agree.

 

[Stevicus]

There are also more than social classes as identities upon which a person can build a worldview and politics. A wealthy women for example could feel a kinship with all women in her society due to her gender and how her gender has shaped her personal and social identity and thus would push for politics that don't benefit her directly like paid family leave, but that would benefit women as a class for example.

Yes, I can see that. That's a good point. But even that has manifested itself in different ways, dependent upon economic classes. There can still be barriers and other factors, but I agree in principle. When it gets to the level of national politics, there are still wide gaps between the leaders and those at the lower end of the scale.