Here's how to explain to people the distinction between fighting poverty and fighting economic inequality.
-
-
Straw man? No part of the political spectrum has felt the need to say that. Reducing inequality is not equivalent to strict equality.
-
People who say economic inequality is bad and should be decreased don't realize they're saying this, but they are. Which is my point.
-
What does "this" refer to? People don't realise they're tacitly suggesting stopping founders as a method, or they're arguing for equality?
-
The former.
-
While it is logically "true" that stopping (some) founders would reduce inequality, in no way does that mean people are advocating for it.
-
It is also logically "true" that I could remove someone's arms in order to reduce BMI. Logically correct but you see where this is going..?
-
Just drop the mic and walk away dude...

- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
This is 100% bullshit. For a start, the thing people are arguing against is massive growth in income inequality, not some income inequality.
-
I'm sure there's a tiny minority out there who thinks everyone should be paid the same, but mostly that's not the case.
-
This is the kind of thing that people are arguing about. Income growth disproportionately affecting the top percent of earners.pic.twitter.com/wnZmjSV6N0
-
This shows that the top 5% of earners have seen massive growth in their incomes since the mid 1980s and no one else has.
-
-
Now, it seems to me that these graphs show that the top 1% are doing pretty damn well. The top 1% country wide earn about $500k a year +
-
And their incomes are rising dramatically. The rest of the country's incomes are not. This is what we mean by rising income inequality.
-
Now, before 1980 this grown was pretty well distributed, and we still managed to have capitalism and new companies and rich people.
- 8 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Only if you use statistically easily distorted measures of inequality, and only if you care about snapshot inequality vs inherited over time
-
Also, most likely we wouldn't have the inequality discussion if real median income in 2017 wasn't < than in 1999.https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N …
-
Falling real median income means half of the population is losing. People worry much less if everybody gains, but some gain more.
- 1 more reply
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.