Inequality - good, bad and neutral

You can’t have it all and must balance among and between good things. Freedom and justice are like that and so are equality and opportunity. It is not a zero sum game and there are times when you can get more of both and in fact have one enhance the other, but not forever. Of the two, opportunity is better. It is not really important that everyone is equal. In fact, few of us want a world like that; it is important to have opportunities to achieve your potential.

Choice and diversity MUST lead to inequality, since different choices, behaviors and habits will produce different outcomes. We can forget that some - much - of our inequality "problem" is the result of choices and we should do little to counter this. The inequality we SHOULD fight is that caused by structural differences and random events.

Random events can be addressed with insurance. It is more complicated than my simple sentence, but it is doable. The bigger problem is in structure. What has happened is that our technology and society has magnified and over-rewarded small differences.

Consider the Oscars. We have a bunch of millionaires who are paid fortunes for what they are. Is there really millions of dollars of difference between Brad Pitt and some guy waiting tables in hopes of getting that good part? Yes. It has to do with star power and the difference of very small percentages. If Brad Pitt is only 1% better and his movies pull in millions of dollars, that small percentage is worth big bucks.

In the past, many people played music. Most were not very good, but they didn't know it. There were places for them where they could earn money. Today a big star makes music that we all buy and listen to. We know that the star is better than the guy down the street. In the past, a big star could make money by filling a concert hall. A limited number of people fit. Today, there is an audience limited only by the population of the planet. With the Internet, the cost of reproducing music is almost zero and few people are employed in sending it around the world.

I choose the example of entertainers because it is easy to see. But it works in other places. It is the key to Bill Gates' wealth, for example.

The problem is protean as it is ubiquitous and growing. A few winners and lots of people getting nothing. Worse, in the case of many things on Internet, we work for nothing. I am currently working for Mark Zuckerberg. I am preparing content, which he aggregates and essentially sells. I get "free" Facebook.

The challenge will be figuring out how to make free pay in order to increase the good inequality and limit the bad.

Posted by Christine & John at March 3, 2014 9:48 AM
Comments
Comment #377026

The bigger problem, for the moment, IMO, is that the status quo seems to be that the exponential growth of inequality is just ok.

Of course, the longer folks will tolerate it Corpocracy is emboldened and loving it. Kinda like Puting rite now.

Posted by: roy ellis at March 3, 2014 12:36 PM
Comment #377027

Roy

The growth of inequality itself is not a problem. A decline of opportunity is the bigger issue and related the decline of the middle. Some of this has to do with the increase of diversity and choice and we might not want to change this.

Posted by: CJ at March 3, 2014 12:45 PM
Comment #377034

Maybe inequality would work, C&J. Let’s say in 10 years that the .1% own everything; cars, clothes, houses, etc. They would be so wealthy they could put each of us on a stipend of say, $100k. In turn, we would rent everything we need; car, clothes, house, etc.

Everybody, except the .1% would be equal. Still do our jobs but each make $100k/yr.

Posted by: roy ellis at March 3, 2014 3:28 PM
Comment #377035

Roy

But that won’t happen.

I would hate it if everyone was equal. And why should I take such a big pay cut anyway?

My goal it to make it to the top 1%. But you know that most people don’t stay in the top 1% for more than a year or two. If I sell lots of timber, I can make it into the top 1% for that year. Of course, it took 30 years to get there, so the average is not nearly so high.

Posted by: CJ at March 3, 2014 3:50 PM
Comment #377048

I still have a problem understanding people who think that the 1% (or now .1%) are the same 1% (or now .1%) now as they were 10 year ago, or will be the same 10 years from now.

Income mobility in this country has been fairly standard over the past several decades, just because a few money lenders got rich because of FED actions by keeping the insurance rate so low for so long (ostensibly to help keep Armageddon from occurring) I don’t see why there is such hysteria in thinking that those same people won’t lose their asses when the punch bowl is finally taken away from them?

A large academic study released in 2014 found income mobility has not changed appreciably in the last 20 years.

The odds of moving up — or down — the income ladder in the United States have not changed appreciably in the last 20 years, according to a large new academic study that contradicts politicians in both parties who have claimed that income mobility is falling.
Posted by: Rhinehold at March 3, 2014 4:27 PM
Comment #377050
Absolute mobility has continued to improve in recent decades because incomes have risen; median family income is about 12 percent higher today than in 1980, adjusted for inflation. As a result, most adults today have more income at their disposal than their parents did at the same age.

From the same article.

BTW, I agree that we could do BETTER at income mobility than we are currently. But that would mean removing barriers, not putting up more. For example, Canada has better income mobility that we currently do. But they achieved this by having fewer regulations on business than the US has, engaging in ‘austerity’ to make their economy stronger than ours and spending the last two decades decentralizing their government while we have been increasing centralization…

But, as with most things, there are just some people who see a problem and wonder what government can do to fix it.

Posted by: Rhinehold at March 3, 2014 4:51 PM
Comment #377053

Everyone can argue about which regulations they would support. If corporations weren’t hell bent for 100% efficiency we wouldn’t need near so many regs.

I like the variety of groceries I can choose from but I also like to know something about what I’m going to eat. You would think corps would willingly label their products. But, they won’t, ink cost too much.

IMO, it is fraud, criminal, corrupt what the food industry legally puts out there for consumers. Any competition is to make food worse, not better.

Give me some regs that tell me country of origin and puts the real contents of the product on the label. If there is wood filler in their I want to know about it.

The FDA is supposedly doing some tests on some products to actually try and determine what is in some food products. Should be interesting, if it ever sees the light of day.

Posted by: roy ellis at March 3, 2014 5:58 PM
Comment #377055

Roy

Never before in the history of the world have people like you and I had so much access to so much variety of food so cheaply.

Maybe you care about all those details of your food. If you do, go to Whole Foods. They can tell you. I don’t care and don’t want to pay more for it.

Posted by: CJ at March 3, 2014 6:26 PM
Comment #377057

Roy

We Americans pay less for food in terms of the amount of time we have to work to earn it.

If people in India pay more for eggs etc, it is probably because of their inefficient distribution systems and interfering government. Indeed, they should do better.

But WE Americans have little to complain about. We are very lucky and despite all our crying and carrying on, things are better now than they were a in the past. I think our problem is not that we have too little but rather that our expectations have grown faster than our capacities. It is the ancient problem. Some people have too much money, but nobody has enough.

Food, like almost everything we use has become less expensive in given quality and the amount of time we have to spend getting it.

Considering our growing girth, it is clear that we could spend even less on food and it might be a good thing. I have been trying to move to better quality. You actually SAVE money that way. Smoked salmon is expensive, but that big bag of potato chips - and I eat the whole big bag - costs about the same for the amount you should eat of the salmon. That Hershey bar will buy a good deal of fresh fruit. Eat less but eat better should be the slogan. To be honest, I don’t really follow my own advice as often as I should. I actually take a kind of perverse pride in my capacity to down a whole box of cookies w/o taking more than a few breaths. But when I don’t do as a should I know that only I am to blame and so I cannot complain.

My father used to use that phrase a lot, “I can’t complain.” He was right.

BTW - One of my “best” meals in Ramen. I know people say Ramen is not good for you and they are right - if you eat only Ramen. But I boil up lots of vegetables and have a whole bowl of vegetables with the Ramen on top for flavor. Ramen is almost free and so are things like cabbage and carrots. I don’t know if you can live off Ramen, but I have been experimenting and so far, so good.

Posted by: CJ at March 3, 2014 9:31 PM
Comment #377060

C&J, some food products may be considered cheap because they contain very little food value but will make you put on pounds quickly. Good food is generally more expensive.

Yes, we use the Ramen noodles too, as they are made in the US. I wouldn’t buy a similar product made overseas, or ‘distributed by US’.

Posted by: roy ellis at March 3, 2014 11:32 PM
Comment #377063

Roy

The data are just not on your side. Almost everything costs you less today in the time you have to work to get it. We are fooled by the dollar prices.

People are fat because they make poor food choices and/or sit around too much. If you can afford to be fat from cheap food, you can afford to be lean with good food.

Posted by: CJ at March 4, 2014 7:53 AM
Comment #378096

air jordans
timberland shoes
kate spade outlet
abercrombie & fitch
coach outlet store online
ugg boots
coach outlet
coach outlet
oakley sunglasses
fendi belt
nike shoes
ferragamo-outlet.org
ray ban sunglasses
moncler jackets
kate spade handbags
barbour
nike free run 3
tory burch shoes
nike outlet
juicy couture
canada goose
juicy couture
marc jacobs
cheap hollister clothing
hogan shoes
coach factory outlet
belstaff-inc.net
chi hair straighteners
dior outlet
true religion outlet
michael kors
bottega veneta handbags
moncler jackets
christian louboitin
ralph lauren outlet
dior handbags
louis vuitton
ran ban outlet
ghd hair straighteners
michael kors outlet
christian louboitin
michael kors handbags
moncler jackets
hermes belts
dior handbags
hermes birkin bag
tory burch outlet
cheap nfl jerseys
beats by dr dre
michael kors outlet
insanity workout dvd
cheap ray ban sunglasses
true religion jeans
ferragamooutletinc.net
dolce & gabbana handbags
true religion jeans
p95x workout
tory burch
belstaff jackets
timberland outlet
michael kors outlet
celine outlet store
jimmy choo shoes
gucci outlet
moncler jackets
belstaff-inc.com
oakley sunglasses
michael kors outlet
ray ban sunglasses
ugg boots
juicy couture
dior handbags
nike free 5.0
beats by dr dre
michael kors
cheap oakley sunglasses
beats by dr dre
spura shoes
ferragamooutletinc.com
cheap jordans
michael kors outlet
cheap jordans
coach factory online
jordan 11
abercrombie & fitch
tory burch sale
dolce & gabbana handbags
alexander wang handbags
tory burch
cheap jerseys
gucci purses
miu miu handags
kate spade handbags
hermes birkin handbag
louis vuitton outlet
givenchy handbags
tory burch
cheap jordans
christian louboitin
dolce & gabbana handbags
abercrombie & fitch
michael kors
louis vuitton
nike free run
barbour
michael kors bags
dolce & gabbana handbags
christian louboitin
the north face outlet
tiffany jewelry
burberry outlet
cheap oakley sunglasses
michael kors outlet
nike outlet
timberland shoes
kate spade outlet
nike free run shoes
ugg boots
ferragamos.org
cheap coach purses
dolce & gabbana handbags
louis vuitton
cheap jordans
tory burch shoes
abercrombie & fitch
canada goose
tory burch
canada goose
spyder jackets
burberry handbags
coach purses outlet
tiffany and co
fitflop shoes
coach factory outlet
spura shoes
true religion jeans
dior handbags
timberland outlet
spura shoes
beats by dr dre
beats by dr dre
jordan 13
fitflop footwear
juicy couture
nike shoes
kate spade
gucci shoes
spura shoes
dior outlet
michael kors outlet
cheap ugg boots
michael kors outlet
coach outlet
dolce & gabbana handbags
kate spade handbags
spura shoes
barbour
tory burch outlet
canada goose outlet
michael kors
cheap jordans
louis vuitton
belstaff
supra shoes
timberland outlet
mulberry handbags
coach store online
spyder jackets
nike free shoes
ferragamos.net
nike free run 5.0
mont blanc
michael kors outlet
christian louboutin outlet
prada outlet
marc jacobs handbags
michael kors watches
gucci handbags
spyder jackets
louboutin outlet
spyder jackets
oakley sunglasses outlet
moncler jackets
coach outlet store online
guess handbags
true religion outlet
louis vuitton outlet
cheap jerseys
fitflop sandals
juicy couture
jordan shoes
nike outlet
timberland outlet
chanel handbags
louis vuitton purses
louis vuitton
belstaff
michael kors outlet
michael kors
canada goose
beats by dr dre
versace sunglasses
toms outlet
hollister clothing store
coach store online
barbour
louis vuitton outlet
belstaff-jackets.net
louis vuitton outlet
abercrombie & fitch
spyder-inc.net
abercrombie & fitch
toms shoes
michael kors handbags
michael kors
moncler jackets
louis vuitton outlet
cheap jordans
coach factory outlet
canada goose
michael kors factory outlet
ferragamo belt
barbour
tory burch
juicy couture
toms shoes
turbo fire dvd
spyder-inc.com
celine bags
christian louboitin
barbour

Posted by: cai80 at April 27, 2014 9:56 PM
Post a comment