Comment Promotion: Talking about Inequality
Michael Drew said
People’s concerns about inequality, from what I can see, have more to do with the issue of the lack of growth at more modest levels of income in the light of these exploding returns to certain ideas and innovations that gain mass traction on a global scale (whether they’re movies, drugs, online networks, or soda pop). Proposals to address this disparity in growth are various
and Brandon Berg replied
But really, if leftists don’t want people to think that they’re complaining about rich people making too much money, then they should stop speaking disparagingly of “income inequality,” “the super-rich,” “the 1%,” “the rich getting richer,” and things like that, and start saying what they actually mean. You can see how we might find that confusing, can’t you?
This part of the comment didn’t get enough love so I thought that I’d promote this. There is a difference between saying those guys are making too much and saying that these guys are not making enough and we can take some from those guys (who can afford it easily) to give to these guys. In the first, inequality is the fundamental problem while in the latter, inequality evidences* a possible solution to helping the worst off.
*I’m not saying that it necessarily actually does, but if inequality mattered in the way Michael Drew was talking about, it would be because the recent increase in inequality unaccompanied by significant gains to the poor stood in an evidentiary relation to the idea that transferring money from the rich to the poor would not significantly reduce the amount of time and effort the rich put into making money.