Good News on Housing

[Conan71]

Income inequality is a problem because it leads to higher crime rates, more poverty, and generally makes this country a worse place to live. And it's got significant (bad) economic consequences.

That's rich.  People being wealthy leads to sociopathic behavior in those who chose to drop out of high school.  Look what a shithole Cuba turned into when they equalized it for everyone.  Russia, Poland, East Germany, Czechloslovakia anyone?

What part of "communism is a failure" did you miss in the last century?

[Red Arrow]

Damn, I keep forgetting that, komrade.  Can I borrow your copy of the manifesto when you are done with it? 

Certainly all of the $375K will be horded or sent offshore to some bank account instead of being used for consumption which provides jobs for others in the economy therefore we must confiscate it and let the government spread it around more efficiently.  Obviously buying expensive cars, furniture, boats, RV's, or spending it on lavish dinners or vacations doesn't provide a single job.

Now you're talkin'    

No, you can't borrow my copy of the manifesto.  I need it for reference to remember how things are supposed to work.  I'm sure the government will give you a copy of your own for a generous tax contribution of $375,000.

[Gaspar]

You have apparently forgotten that there is a fixed amount of wealth out there.  If someone is greedy and makes $500,000/yr instead of a more equitable $125,000/yr, then there is $375,000 less money available to spread around.

Huh?  Let's analyse your statement. 

You have apparently forgotten that there is a fixed amount of wealth out there.

Completely untrue.  The average poor person in this country has a higher standard of living than the average person in most European countries.  We have generated a standard of living through the generation of wealth via innovation and hard work that is an example to the world.  If your statement were true, our standard of living would remain the same.  Yet as the rich get richer the poor get plasma TVs.

If someone is greedy and makes $500,000/yr instead of a more equitable $125,000/yr

What if they are not greedy.  What if they work hard building a business and make $500,000 a year.  Not everyone successful is greedy.  On the contrary, most of the wealthy people I know are very kind and giving.  In fact, every boss I have ever had has been extremely wealthy, and far more charitable than any of my poor friends.

. . .less money available to spread around.

Money is not spread around, it is earned.  It flows to those who work hard and innovate.  It flows away from the lazy, and the foolish.

The standard of living of the common man is higher in those countries which have the greatest number of wealthy entrepreneurs. – Ludwig von Mises

Capitalism has created the highest standard of living ever known on earth. The evidence is incontrovertible. The contrast between West and East Berlin is the latest demonstration, like a laboratory experiment for all to see. Yet those who are loudest in proclaiming their desire to eliminate poverty are loudest in denouncing capitalism. Man's well-being is not their goal. – Ayn Rand, Theory and Practice



Those who rail against "the greedy" suffer from the sin of envy.  they are consumed with hatred that flows from the guilt of their failures.  They cannot forgive themselves.

[Red Arrow]

That's rich.  People being wealthy leads to sociopathic behavior in those who chose to drop out of high school.  Look what a shithole Cuba turned into when they equalized it for everyone.  Russia, Poland, East Germany, Czechloslovakia anyone?

What part of "communism is a failure" did you miss in the last century?

If everyone is equally poor, you can't be envious of your neighbors' stuff.  They don't have anything either.  Is everybody happy?

[Gaspar]

If everyone is equally poor, you can't be envious of your neighbors' stuff.  They don't have anything either.  Is everybody happy?

That is a personal problem. 

Why be envious of anyone.  I am not wealthy.  I hope to be some day.  I do not envy my wealthy neighbors, I learn from them.  They have much to teach.

[Red Arrow]

Huh?  Let's analyse your statement.  Completely untrue.  The average poor person in this country has a higher standard of living than the average person in most European countries.  We have generated a standard of living through the generation of wealth via innovation and hard work that is an example to the world.  If your statement were true, our standard of living would remain the same.  Yet as the rich get richer the poor get plasma TVs.
What if they are not greedy.  What if they work hard building a business and make $500,000 a year.  Not everyone successful is greedy.  On the contrary, most of the wealthy people I know are very kind and giving.  In fact, every boss I have ever had has been extremely wealthy, and far more charitable than any of my poor friends.
Money is not spread around, it is earned.  It flows to those who work hard and innovate.  It flows away from the lazy, and the foolish.

The standard of living of the common man is higher in those countries which have the greatest number of wealthy entrepreneurs. – Ludwig von Mises

Capitalism has created the highest standard of living ever known on earth. The evidence is incontrovertible. The contrast between West and East Berlin is the latest demonstration, like a laboratory experiment for all to see. Yet those who are loudest in proclaiming their desire to eliminate poverty are loudest in denouncing capitalism. Man's well-being is not their goal. – Ayn Rand, Theory and Practice



Those who rail against "the greedy" suffer from the sin of envy.  they are consumed with hatred that flows from the guilt of their failures.  They cannot forgive themselves.

Gee, I never thought of it that way
[/sarcasm]  I gotta get back to work.

[Conan71]

Yet as the rich get richer the poor get plasma TVs.

It's only fair.

Actually, I heard a fair amount choose LED rather than plasma.

[TheArtist]

You have apparently forgotten that there is a fixed amount of wealth out there.  If someone is greedy and makes $500,000/yr instead of a more equitable $125,000/yr, then there is $375,000 less money available to spread around.

Bullpuckey.  

 You know, It takes a lot to start and or build a business.  You work lots of extra hours, evenings, weekends, holidays etc.  There are all kinds of hoops you have to jump through, a lot of stress and responsibility, paperwork, taxes, insurance, advertising...  Takes a lot of creativity, failing and trying again, sacrifice up front with no promise of success later, etc. etc. etc.

So lets say I work my arse off for years and years and get to the place where I can hire people.  The point of hiring people is for me, the owner, is to finally reap my reward and make a lot of money.  I didnt go through all that crap just so some new guy who didnt go through all of that could come in and instantly make anywhere near what I am making.  

If the "worker" doesnt like that,,, they are perfectly free to go ahead and build their own business.  They can then see how "easy" it is.  

Same goes for someone who invested their time and effort in college.  Sacrifice up front for a hoped for, but not certain, greater reward later.

 

Another reason for greater "income disparity" has nothing to do with the above, but has to do with larger markets in this modern world.  Hundreds of millions more people to sell to, all with easy access to goods.  As in,,, If I invent or create the next big thing, a fancy wachamacallit that people want, or even just a silly trinket.  Even if I am only making pennies on the dollar on each, today an individual has the potential to sell to markets of hundreds of millions, if not billions.  I could be instantly a LOT richer than the average guy.  If Megamart picks your toy to sell in its stores,,, Instant mega disparity. Write a best seller today, hit movie, newest rad clothing design, whatever... if it goes "viral" you can be richer than the same thing being sold to the smaller reach and markets of past generations.  While the guy behind the counter selling the products is going to be making what he made before.  Its not making any difference to his wage potential whether he is selling your item in one store, or "they" are selling your item in thousands of stores all over the country or world to millions.  Nothing has changed for you or for him, but the scale of potential reward for the person creating the goods being sold.  You may sell 10, or 100, or millions of something. You can't and shouldn't want to regulate that, and why would you want to?  

[Gaspar]

Those greedy artists should share the wealth.

[nathanm]

That's rich.  People being wealthy leads to sociopathic behavior in those who chose to drop out of high school.  Look what a shithole Cuba turned into when they equalized it for everyone.  Russia, Poland, East Germany, Czechloslovakia anyone?

What part of "communism is a failure" did you miss in the last century?

At least now I see why you see the world in the way you do. You only see the extremes. It's either "capitalism" or "communism." "Freedom" or "oppression." It's as if there is nothing in between.

[guido911]

Bullpuckey.  

 You know, It takes a lot to start and or build a business.  You work lots of extra hours, evenings, weekends, holidays etc.  There are all kinds of hoops you have to jump through, a lot of stress and responsibility, paperwork, taxes, insurance, advertising...  Takes a lot of creativity, failing and trying again, sacrifice up front with no promise of success later, etc. etc. etc.

So lets say I work my arse off for years and years and get to the place where I can hire people.  The point of hiring people is for me, the owner, is to finally reap my reward and make a lot of money.  I didnt go through all that crap just so some new guy who didnt go through all of that could come in and instantly make anywhere near what I am making.  

If the "worker" doesnt like that,,, they are perfectly free to go ahead and build their own business.  They can then see how "easy" it is.  

Same goes for someone who invested their time and effort in college.  Sacrifice up front for a hoped for, but not certain, greater reward later.

 

Another reason for greater "income disparity" has nothing to do with the above, but has to do with larger markets in this modern world.  Hundreds of millions more people to sell to, all with easy access to goods.  As in,,, If I invent or create the next big thing, a fancy wachamacallit that people want, or even just a silly trinket.  Even if I am only making pennies on the dollar on each, today an individual has the potential to sell to markets of hundreds of millions, if not billions.  I could be instantly a LOT richer than the average guy.  If Megamart picks your toy to sell in its stores,,, Instant mega disparity. Write a best seller today, hit movie, newest rad clothing design, whatever... if it goes "viral" you can be richer than the same thing being sold to the smaller reach and markets of past generations.  While the guy behind the counter selling the products is going to be making what he made before.  Its not making any difference to his wage potential whether he is selling your item in one store, or "they" are selling your item in thousands of stores all over the country or world to millions.  Nothing has changed for you or for him, but the scale of potential reward for the person creating the goods being sold.  You may sell 10, or 100, or millions of something. You can't and shouldn't want to regulate that, and why would you want to?  

Good post.

[Conan71]

At least now I see why you see the world in the way you do. You only see the extremes. It's either "capitalism" or "communism." "Freedom" or "oppression." It's as if there is nothing in between.

What do you think "income equality" is, Nate?

[nathanm]

What do you think "income equality" is, Nate?

There you go again, seeing only the polar opposites. There is a place between the high and increasing income inequality we have now and full equality. We had it for much of the 20th century in this country, and the healthy middle class was one of the key reasons we had such a robust economy.

Nobody says everyone should make the same thing, but maybe it's a bit much for a CEO to make literally a thousand of time more than the average FTE worker in a company. Being privately owned, any business is free, and should be free, to pay a CEO it hires anything it likes. That doesn't mean that sort of radical difference ought to be encouraged, though.

And sorry about my tone in my previous post. It wasn't necessary.

[Conan71]

There you go again, seeing only the polar opposites. There is a place between the high and increasing income inequality we have now and full equality. We had it for much of the 20th century in this country, and the healthy middle class was one of the key reasons we had such a robust economy.

Nobody says everyone should make the same thing, but maybe it's a bit much for a CEO to make literally a thousand of time more than the average FTE worker in a company. Being privately owned, any business is free, and should be free, to pay a CEO it hires anything it likes. That doesn't mean that sort of radical difference ought to be encouraged, though.

And sorry about my tone in my previous post. It wasn't necessary.

You aren't channeling Reagan are you?  

I'm totally confused what you are getting at, on the one hand you say a company should be free to pay a CEO whatever it likes, but that a CEO making 1000 times what the average worker is making is a bad thing.

It's normal in a capitalistic economy to reward those who provide jobs for others with more income than those they manage or employ.  I assure you, I earned every penny and grey hair when I managed others and was compensated for doing so.  If the board of directors thinks a CEO is performing well enough to reward them with handsome bonuses, it's their call.  It's certainly not leading to the erosion of modern society however.

Much like artist alluded to, I'm not aware of any entrepreneur who went into business for themself to make less than those they employ, though it can happen if they are properly compensating sales staff or if they have a key staff member without whom the company could not exist.  I out-earned my boss a couple of years, he didn't begrudge me for it, he simply gave himself a raise in subsequent years.  Much like the BOD of a corporation giving huge bonuses to a CEO, they do it because he/she is worth it to them.  

[nathanm]

I don't understand what's confusing about thinking someone should be free to do something yet think that thing that they should be free to do is something they shouldn't do. It's like those yahoos in Alaska who were openly carrying guns at their little rally. It shouldn't be illegal to do that, but I still think it's dumb.

Nor am I saying that CEOs should make less than the average employee, but we seem to have gotten by just fine back when it was only a hundred times the average worker's salary rather than a thousand. In any event, it's merely one example of income inequality. My point is that if resources get concentrated too much at the top, everyone else won't have enough money to buy your stuff.