Economics (Was: the free software paradigm)

"Duncan Rose" <duncan.rose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 26 Jul 2006 03:3:
(if I had to choose, I'd say it was bad; I think we should structure
society in such a way that the poorer get richer faster than the rich get
richer)

This is, of course, easily possible simply by making a tax system that removes
all the excess wealth of the rich. In other words, it's trivial to drag all
the rich down to the same level as the poor, and then they'd all be equal.
Are you sure you'd prefer such a society?

(It's much, MUCH harder to raise the poor up to the same level as the current
rich.)

I am concerned with the gap between rich and poor and 'relative wealth' in
so far as the weakest in society are not really benefitting by being
'better off' (since in terms of overall spending ability, they are actually
not better off since they fall lower and lower down the 'wealth' curve).

These are not the same things, though. I agree that just counting dollars
doesn't help much, for inflation if no other reason. We really need to track
"spending power" of some kind.

But the world really is becoming wealthier over time. Poor people in the US
typically have a roof over their heads, aren't in danger of starvation or
random neighborhood violence, can watch free TV all day long, etc. Far, far
better off than the poor in many other countries, much less the poor centuries
or millennia ago.

Of course the rich are even better off than that. But the truth is that the
poor are objectively better off today "in terms of overall spending ability",
than they were in the distant past.

I suspect that until relatively recently the bulk of humans lived on a
reasonably equal basis (impoverished by modern standards for sure, but
relative to the wealth (by any definition) available at the time, not
impoverished. Poverty is after all a relative measure -- at least it is
when *I* define it ;-).

Ah, you've _defined_ poverty to be relative. Well then of course you make
statements that others won't agree with, since nobody else means the same thing
by that word.

Typically poverty is about things like being able to provide shelter, worrying
about where your next meal is coming from, threats of death from disease or
violence, infant mortality rates, etc.

Note that none of these things are relative. If your ancestors often starved
to death due to lack of food, but you have reliable access to enough calories
to sustain life, most people (but not you, apparently) would say that you are
less poor than your ancestors were.

Regardless of what happened to the fate of the ultra-rich during that same
period.

In order for *my* economy to work, there must be population control. I
don't have a problem with that although I think the very concept makes
many uncomfortable. I think if we don't PLAN to control our population,
it will be controlled on our behalf at some point in a manner we'll all
find far less comfortable

Ah. I don't disagree with you actually, but I suspect you'll find that you
don't get much sympathy from other folks who are ostensibly on "your side"
(at least in the economic part of the discussion).

A socially just (Marxist?) economy, combined with radical population control.
Intriguing! An unusual combination.

You should look into China's economy. The bulk of the population consists of
lots and lots of poor peasants living off the land, plus draconian population
control imposed by the government. Perhaps China is your utopia!

-- Don
_______________________________________________________________________________
Don Geddis http://don.geddis.org/ don@xxxxxxxxxx
"I think," said Christopher Robin, "that we ought to eat all our provisions
now, so we won't have so much to carry." -- A. A. Milne
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: So after the Democrats clean house tomorrow.
    ... The top 20% of Americans earn basically half of the income. ... choose to pursue as a society. ... Those who get rich do so within ... You mean like almost every social institution and the poor? ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Jews and the Muhammud cartoons
    ... Maybe Bill Gates clings to every dollar as if it's ... money whatseover (which is why he's poor). ... The Marxist idea, which HAS gotten into our society, is ... rich man make the poor equally rich, ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • Re: So Food prices will skyrocket due to using corn for gasoline?
    ... So a basic staple for human existence, poor or rich, goes up, while a ... commodity you can, to a degree, control is ...
    (rec.sport.pro-wrestling)
  • Re: Economic Growth as a moral issue
    ... They consume little more than the poor, ... a rich man or a rich society consumes a great deal more of the world's natural resources than a poor man or a poor society. ...
    (uk.philosophy.humanism)
  • Re: Definition of "rich"?
    ... if is a lifetime or more you are rich. ... But he does have a lot of control over other people. ... of society but the people themselves; ... discretion, the remedy is not to take it from ...
    (sci.econ)