Why not make the rich compete?

The article makes solid points with the exception of aiming for a more egalitarian outcome. A more egalitarian playing field is a very different goal and supportable. Egalitarian outcomes aren't.

We should shrink patent protections because it opens the market to more competition. We shouldn't use government to set up walled gardens in the economy.

I don't see how an egalitarian playing won't lead to an egalitarian outcome? I don't think this distinction exists.

I'm unfamiliar with a policy that crated a equal playing field that also didn't create an equal outcome or vice versa.
 
I don't see how an egalitarian playing won't lead to an egalitarian outcome? I don't think this distinction exists.

I'm unfamiliar with a policy that crated a equal playing field that also didn't create an equal outcome or vice versa.

Really? I guess I'd have to see your examples of equal outcomes to understand where you're coming from...
 
Really? I guess I'd have to see your examples of equal outcomes to understand where you're coming from...

Just look at places with a low gini index like Denmark, Sweden etc. Those countries implemented policies that lead to a more or less equal outcome for the citizenry compared to USA.

Now you could say that there is still some form of inequality in those countries, but again that's because the playing field isn't exactly level either.

Economic Inequality mostly comes from invisible barriers and inherited privilege.
 
Just look at places with a low gini index like Denmark, Sweden etc. Those countries implemented policies that lead to a more or less equal outcome for the citizenry compared to USA.

Now you could say that there is still some form of inequality in those countries, but again that's because the playing field isn't exactly level either.

Economic Inequality mostly comes from invisible barriers and inherited privilege.
I’ve been to Sweden and Denmark. My loving standard is higher than anyone I ran into there (sure they were upper middle class and not wealthy). I’ll pass. I’ll meet you halfway. Increased Pell grants and raise the cutoff for Medicaid.
 
I’ve been to Sweden and Denmark. My loving standard is higher than anyone I ran into there (sure they were upper middle class and not wealthy). I’ll pass. I’ll meet you halfway. Increased Pell grants and raise the cutoff for Medicaid.

What if i said I'd rather conflict than that lame compromise? That's basically the story of the French Revolution. If you were smart you'd avoid that at all costs.
 
Because look at the Amazon vs Google fight right now. It affects technology and consumers.

But when they work together we get amazing products. So there are pros and cons. We see 2 big giant companies working together all the time and those products are usually the best. If only there's a way for everyone to work with each other without screwing the smaller people.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/kepler-mission-nasa-reveal-ai-110329816.html

Look at this. Nasa and Google making huge progress

I could take or leave these amazing products. I'm pretty sure the net effect on society has been negative.
 
What if i said I'd rather conflict than that lame compromise? That's basically the story of the French Revolution. If you were smart you'd avoid that at all costs.
You do not have the balls to do anything like that. You will tweet viva la resistance and wear a Che shirt. That’s all.
 
You do not have the balls to do anything like that. You will tweet viva la resistance and wear a Che shirt. That’s all.

No I've been to my fair share of actions some of which were not entirely legal. I could have gotten arrested a couple times. I don't think you can say the same.

Go ahead and say you are willing to disobey the law and risk jail for tax evasion if income taxes go up. Or that you attend a protest without a permit if the banks are nationalized.

What did the right wing do when the banks where temporarily nationalized back in 2008 again? Nothing. Compare that to Occupy Wall street, BLM etc. When did the Tea party confront the police?
 
No I've been to my fair share of actions some of which were not entirely legal. I could have gotten arrested a couple times. I don't think you can say the same.

Go ahead and say you are willing to disobey the law and risk jail for tax evasion if income taxes go up. Or that you attend a protest without a permit.
Ah you rebel you
 
They already compete

trading-places-bet-scene.jpg
 
Jacobin has beeb putting put a lot of great content

Not a SJW wing of the left, closer to the old school left economic ideals, the side the Clintons abandoned then torpedoed.
 
Just look at places with a low gini index like Denmark, Sweden etc. Those countries implemented policies that lead to a more or less equal outcome for the citizenry compared to USA.

Now you could say that there is still some form of inequality in those countries, but again that's because the playing field isn't exactly level either.

Economic Inequality mostly comes from invisible barriers and inherited privilege.

They don't have equal outcomes, as you noted. Not even remotely close.

See, while the Nordic countries have low gini coefficients, it's because they apply significant government redistribution strategies to smooth out unequal outcomes.

Do you have an example that actually results in equal outcomes?

Your statement on economic inequality is only partially correct but until you can find an example of an egalitarian playing field that results in actual equal outcomes there's no point going down that road.
 
They don't have equal outcomes, as you noted. Not even remotely close.

See, while the Nordic countries have low gini coefficients, it's because they apply significant government redistribution strategies to smooth out unequal outcomes.

Do you have an example that actually results in equal outcomes?

Your statement on economic inequality is only partially correct but until you can find an example of an egalitarian playing field that results in actual equal outcomes there's no point going down that road.

Huh? I already explained how I was using the word equality and there was nuance to it.

If you look at places that have the least barriers to enter the market and rated as most competitive the Nordic countries are higher than USA. Also those countries tend to have lower gini coefficients.

I still have no idea what you meant by "equal playing field". What does that look like to you?
 
Last edited:
Huh? I already explained how I was using the word equality and there was nuance to it.

If you look at places that have the least barriers to enter the market and rated as most competitive the Nordic countries are higher than USA. Also those countries tend to have lower gini coefficients.

I still have no idea what you meant by "equal playing field". What does that look like to you?

And I pointed out that those countries have lower gini coefficients because they use the government to offset the inequalities that they produced. They don't produce equal outcomes, they produce unequal ones and then redistribute away those inequalities.
 
And I pointed out that those countries have lower gini coefficients because they use the government to offset the inequalities that they produced. They don't produce equal outcomes, they produce unequal ones and then redistribute away those inequalities.

OK. Do you have a counter example of a level playing field that is preferable or not?
 
Why would anyone want equal outcomes? That sounds terrible...
 
OK. Do you have a counter example of a level playing field that is preferable or not?

I never claimed that such an example existed. I said that equal playing fields are an acceptable goal, equal outcomes are not.
 
Back
Top