You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: **The Richest Americans Have Much More Pie Than You Think!**

in #money7 years ago

The developed world (West) bicker over the "equitable" distribution of resources raped from neo-colonial saps of Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. It is true that the wealthy own much of the resources, but the West owns disproportionately more wealth compared with the rest of the world. Would the West be willing to surrender the power and wealth accumulated over the last hundred years? Unlikely, and rightly so.

Life is not fair or equal; to believe such is foolhardy and harmful. Human society will always be unequal with the ruling class and the ruled class. Much, if not all, of man's station and success derives from God, or dice of the Universe. Either man can choose to accept his lot in life and live according to his station, or he can choose to live in misery, anger, and envy under the delusion of pernicious concepts like "fairness," "equality," "democracy," or "justice."

Sort:  

Interesting take. You're right to perceive that I was only thinking about the US, so thanks for adding that to the discussion. I still think a more equitable distribution of wealth would end up benefiting everybody more than it harms them, so you haven't convinced me that we should use taxes to roll the dice in favor of people who already have a lot. Doesn't that weight the dice in their favor? Anyway, thanks for chiming in.

Regardless of how the tax code is structured, the wealthy will always benefit from the legal system in hoarding their ill-gotten gains. Reduction of wealth inequality, or the wealth gap, is positive trend. Well governed and properly functioning society will not permit such ravenous accumulation of resources by a select few. The problem, however, is not legal or political but societal. The modern West has deluded itself in the ludicrous concepts of "meritocracy" and "free" market. As long as accumulation of wealth is justified with "merit" of the blessed chum and rampant inequality rationalized as the "cost" of a "free" market, any social structure will devolve into the mercantile and mercenary sociopolitical dissolution that is the modern West.

While the reality of the class distinction and separartion can not be denied or wished away, in a more older, civilized times, the ruling class frowned upon modern Western mercantile sensibility. The force of social ostracism kept the ruling class on check, regarding excessive wealth accumulation and gaudy displays. Modern "democracy" and the rise of the mercantile muck has ruined decent sensibility.

I agree it's not fair, but that's not to say we should just give up and let things stay the way they are. Plenty of interesting thought experiments about things like universal income, and just the fact that things today are better than they were historically, (hard to quantify, but access to information is a big one too, for example)

Yes, you're right. Also it's not just about fair. It's about what is best for everybody. I believe public schools are best for everybody even though richer people pay more in property tax. Do wealthier people want to be surrounded by a bunch of illiterate people? I doubt they'd enjoy that sort of society.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.19
TRX 0.13
JST 0.029
BTC 60723.46
ETH 3353.68
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.51