[FoRK] Income distribution changes over the last 30+ years

Reza B'Far reza.bfar at oracle.com
Thu Nov 11 00:20:09 PST 2010

I don't agree.  What I'm saying is that the problem is not that complex.  If you get lots of under-employed college grads, etc... folks with valuable skills who see the hours of their lives not being justifiably compensated, you have a problem.  It's funny that folks like Bill Oreily always talk about the "Deadweight".  This is not the core problem.  Core problem is equity:  Are you getting paid worth what you're contributing to society?  This is what the original discussion was.  If you get massive equities, you have a social problem.  There is a cap to the percentage of what I hope you mean by "Deadweight" (there are alternatives to your definition that I hope you don't mean).

The problem is someone who say, invents something significant, versus someone who shuffles money around in some complex financial system have inequitable contribution/reward ratios.  And you can make it as complex as you want and look at it from as many different perspectives as you want... at the end of the day, history shows that this is not a stable-match.  If you end up with what I would call "objective injustice" that is everywhere and prevalent (I don't think we're there yet), you have a fundamental problem in maintaining a stable system.

----- Original Message -----
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com
To: fork at xent.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 11:48:56 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: [FoRK] Income distribution changes over the last 30+ years

On Nov 10, 2010, at 11:19 PM, Reza B'Far wrote:
> IMHO Income distribution does matter, per se, if the masses start to see that there are huge inequity despite how hard they may try, etc. etc.  

The problem you are getting at is what happens when net consumers significantly exceed the number of net producers in an economy *and* you have a political system that grants franchise such that the political power rests with the net consumers. Yeah, you always have the pitchforks-at-the-gates problem, but that really isn't the case here for the most part.

It does not seem that the core issue is that people are being robbed blind or some such (though there is some of that) but that people are having a hard time coming to terms with the fact that they produce diminishing value in a modern economy. Deadweight wants to be paid the wage they were accustomed to back when things were less efficient but no one can afford it anymore *and* it is easier to detect and excise said deadweight.

Bottom line, our society is not prepared to deal in a constructive way with the reality that a rapidly growing fraction of the population are hopelessly net consumers.
FoRK mailing list

More information about the FoRK mailing list