@Mark Pitts, depends on what a flatter distribution of wealth would do for economic growth and purchasing power. Mind you, it's not something that's been tried with communism – that stupid system keeps almost everyone poor, but the party bosses rich indeed.
Complexity can only be equated to "adaptability" or "cleverness" if it can be demonstrated to create (rather than extract or even simply consume) value. Complexity that creates no value is just chaos, which has a natural tendency to occur.
Inequality is fundamentally about knowledge thereof. We may all be dirt poor, primitive and ignorant relative to some pan-galactic super-civilisation, but this does not affect our happiness one whit. Instead, we evaluate ourselves relative to what we could realistically achieve. The unhappiness generated by inequality is in the gap between what we have and what we have seen others as having – social standing and power (which become major concerns once we are warm, safe, and fed) are zero sum. How much can you unilaterally influence my life or how much can I unilaterally influence yours.
In comparing two situations, you cannot disappear some things but not associated others. If the manager were to disappear, would the business's productive assets disappear with him or would they be distributed to the other 9. If the latter, I strongly suspect that they would not be more unhappy (and form some business on their own). If the former, then it is the disappearance of assets that they previously knew were there that would be lamented.
Lending is risky, not borrowing. If a Nigerian prince asks to borrow $10,000 from you, it is you who must do the due diligence on his ability to pay, not him.
The financial system failed because too much power was held in too few hands (each pair of which was subject to the inescapable human traits of – inter alia – greed, laziness, and irrationality), and this applies equally to governmental and non-governmental actors in the system. This imbalance of power led to unadulterated mooching (again, as any significant imbalance of power inevitably does). Unfortunately, the over-centralisation has remained in place throughout the crisis (perhaps growing even worse) and the mooching has continued unabated.
Romney is the candidate of the James Taggarts and the Wesley Mouchs of modern America.
Too Big To Handle
@Mark Pitts, depends on what a flatter distribution of wealth would do for economic growth and purchasing power. Mind you, it's not something that's been tried with communism – that stupid system keeps almost everyone poor, but the party bosses rich indeed.
Too Big To Handle
Complexity can only be equated to "adaptability" or "cleverness" if it can be demonstrated to create (rather than extract or even simply consume) value. Complexity that creates no value is just chaos, which has a natural tendency to occur.
Happiness Is Equality
Inequality is fundamentally about knowledge thereof. We may all be dirt poor, primitive and ignorant relative to some pan-galactic super-civilisation, but this does not affect our happiness one whit. Instead, we evaluate ourselves relative to what we could realistically achieve. The unhappiness generated by inequality is in the gap between what we have and what we have seen others as having – social standing and power (which become major concerns once we are warm, safe, and fed) are zero sum. How much can you unilaterally influence my life or how much can I unilaterally influence yours.
Happiness Is Equality
In comparing two situations, you cannot disappear some things but not associated others. If the manager were to disappear, would the business's productive assets disappear with him or would they be distributed to the other 9. If the latter, I strongly suspect that they would not be more unhappy (and form some business on their own). If the former, then it is the disappearance of assets that they previously knew were there that would be lamented.
Mitt and the Moochers
>> too much risk taking by homeowners<<
Lending is risky, not borrowing. If a Nigerian prince asks to borrow $10,000 from you, it is you who must do the due diligence on his ability to pay, not him.
The financial system failed because too much power was held in too few hands (each pair of which was subject to the inescapable human traits of – inter alia – greed, laziness, and irrationality), and this applies equally to governmental and non-governmental actors in the system. This imbalance of power led to unadulterated mooching (again, as any significant imbalance of power inevitably does). Unfortunately, the over-centralisation has remained in place throughout the crisis (perhaps growing even worse) and the mooching has continued unabated.
Romney is the candidate of the James Taggarts and the Wesley Mouchs of modern America.