It's depends on the extent of the wealth inequality.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
if you look at the data, the societies in which there was the least "wealth inequality" were also the societies that had the least technological advancements to benefit all people, and had lower overall quality of life for all. "wealth inequality" is a suspicious measure at best
-
I feel like I would def argue the causation is flipped there and the correlation is better described as societies with most tech advancements had most inequality — which makes total sense
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
the income equality trajectory we're on, absolutely
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It really depends on the proportions. Even significant inequalities are natural -- we all have different abilities / drive / background. What's worrying is the runaway curve that we see today. Like all other runaway trends, it is not sustainable and will correct itself.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think it’s a matter of degrees. Some wealth inequality, sure. A tiny group of super rich, and the rest of the population at or below subsistence levels, nope.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Increasingly I think it’s a problem, not because inequality itself is a problem (in a modern economy it’s probably a sign that a lot of innovation is going on, actually), but because enough people will think it’s a problem that their reaction is likely to be a problem
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
High wealth inequality reduces the efficiency of markets
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
