Tax just the rich more? Maybe not.

[Ograbme]

@adaher

The distribution of wealth is related to the distribution of production.

Nope, gains in productivity have not been matched by increased real wages.

[Kearsen]

@pjnlsn

Semantics aside, and again:

I’m sorry that your empathizing with the people at the top makes you unwilling to seek a direct solution, or a solution at all, but it’s ultimately just what the people would want.

Finally, no, it would not really be a solution if the rich doubled their wealth but poverty decreased by half. That would be the problem doubling itself combined with a small patch for the grossest effects of the problem. In any other context if someone were to suggest that be a solution I would tell them they were delusional. Or, in this case, excessively biased. However, if the rich doubled their wealth, but the poor and middle class did as well, this would be better than before, and most definitely better than what you suggested, but would be the status quo as far as the distribution of wealth inside the country.

How many posts are you going to reiterate that there is an easy simple solution but offer nothing?

Well, what is it?

[adaher]

@Ograbme

Nope, gains in productivity have not been matched by increased real wages.

Yes, for workers who become more productive.

[pjnlsn]

@Kearsen

How many posts are you going to reiterate that there is an easy simple solution but offer nothing?

Well, what is it?

Is that what was written?

Do you recognize the problem as being a problem?

[pjnlsn]

@adaher

Yes, for workers who become more productive.

Extreme inequality of wealth is accompanies by a less extreme inequality of income, and an effective loss of wages compared to production value, particularly in what are colloquially referred to as “blue-collar” work, over about the same time period as the pattern of escalating wealth inequality.

[pjnlsn]

@adaher

The distribution of wealth is related to the distribution of production. Technology enables the highly productive to be even more highly productive, without granting those same productivity gains to low skill workers. More often, technology simply replaces low skill workers. THus, wealth inequality increases.

that’s the problem. Redistributing wealth doesn’t fix the problem, it just treats one of the symptoms. You’d have better luck trying to redistribute loving parents, intelligence, height, or good looks.

Disregarding differences in how terms are defined between writer and reader:

That’s not strictly relevant. It’s not as though anybody said the problem had no reason to exist at all.

I’m sorry that your empathizing with the people at the top makes you unwilling to seek a direct solution, or a solution at all, but it’s ultimately just what the people would want. To remove and prevent the usage of certain technologies, I don’t know that this is what the people would want.

[pjnlsn]

@pjnlsn

Extreme inequality of wealth is accompanies by a less extreme inequality of income, and an effective loss of wages compared to production value, particularly in what are colloquially referred to as “blue-collar” work, over about the same time period as the pattern of escalating wealth inequality.

Er, accompanied*

[Ograbme]

@adaher

Yes, for workers who become more productive.

Is this true?

[LinusK]

@Ograbme

Is this true?

No. Rich people are rich mainly because they own stuff, not because of the work they do. If the rich are getting richer it’s because of the productivity of people who actually work, not because rich people are getting better at owning stuff.

[adaher]

Sure, the owners of capital. They get rich because the workers are more productive, thus meaning they can hire fewer of them and keep more money for themselves. Mark Zuckerburg, Arianna Huffington, and Bill Gates are all great examples.

However, the staff of those companies also get a lot more money.