Fun statistical trick: Suppose Trianglestan has a population of 10. The poorest Trianglestani makes $1/year, the richest makes $10.
-
-
@St_Rev@simplic10 ergo inequality in and of itself is irrelevant -
@degermonik@St_Rev think that is mostly right. There are a couple senses in wc inequality per see arguably bad. -
@degermonik@St_Rev (1) relative status matters as well as absolute wealth. Sucks to be only guy on the block without a nice bbq. -
@degermonik@St_Rev (2) greater relative wealth gives ppl ability to "mess with" the relatively poorer (lawsuits, compete for good n'hoods) -
@degermonik@St_Rev OTOH (1) is basically envy and arguably ppl should just be less envious, not reify their envy in policy -
@simplic10@St_Rev I've noticed most economists don't seem to care that much about positional goods as part of solving welfare problems
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@St_Rev@simplic10 think of inequality as a symptom, not a cause of problems, and everything makes much more senseThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@St_Rev@simplic10 The problem in the US isn't income inequality; it's that being poor sucks. You can fix that without reducing inequalityThanks. 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.
. Banned in Sweden. SubGenius, Zhuangist, white-hat troll. Defrocked mathematician. Brain problems.