@paulg your argument still supposes people want a Gini coefficient of 0, which no one is proposing. Reducing != eliminating.
-
-
-
@LukasThoms "Nearly all say it is bad if economic inequality increases, and that it would be better if it decreased." -
@paulg Ah ok, on closer read I see you've avoided that this time. Too much of the longer version stuck in my head! -
@paulg Speaking as a wealth-seeking entrepreneur, I think it's possible to reduce the extreme upside and still not affect our incentives. -
@LukasThoms Yes, probably. I advocated that in the original: "let's attack poverty, and if necessary damage wealth in the process."
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@paulg Simplified version's still a weird defense of startups against someone, somewhere, who wants to eliminate them. No one argues that. -
@ElizDwyer Few *consciously* do. But anyone against great variations in wealth is implicitly against startups. -
@paulg Startups are just one thing that can cause an individual/family to hold huge wealth; could say lottery tix too. Inheritance biggest. -
@paulg What people against inequality are against are exploitative wages, disproportionate political influence. Ex. Wal-Mart, Uber. -
@ElizDwyer That's like saying people who are against the integers are against the odd integers. -
@paulg Exactly. Critical responses all saying we're not against the integers. We're against actions 'too much' inequality tends to engender. -
@paulg So, 2 ways to fix it: reduce inequality &/or reduce bad results. Since you're someone w/power, curious to read an essay on the latter
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@paulg worth noting that you ignore the results of inequality, which are also bad (high variability in political power, for instance) -
@far33d I explicitly refer to this type of problem in the original essay: http://paulgraham.com/ineq.html#f7n -
@paulg removing money from politics / other influence will be the most difficult of these to eradicate.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
-
@mamund "Since economic inequality per se is not bad, we should not attack it. Instead we should attack the bad things that cause it." -
@philhaussler "since hydrochloric acid itelf is not bad", "since sunlight itself is not bad," ... this is just another strawman. weak sauce. -
@mamund My point: he didn't say what you said he said. Possible to disagree without misrepresenting. Also, let's not attack sunlight or HCl. -
@philhaussler you've read his inertial piece, right: http://b.mamund.com/1OIKqyD "I've become an expert on how to increase economic inequality" -
@philhaussler his "being hunted" metaphor in p4 makes it clear to me that discussions about "eliminating inequality" is not to be tolerated. -
@philhaussler "attack", "they want to kill me" do a disservice to@paulg's POV as they provoke emotional responses, not thoughtful replies.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.