Comments on: Happiness? Equality? What? http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/06/08/happiness-equality-what/ The Sweet Release of Reason Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:11:50 +0000 hourly 1 By: Wild Pegasus http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/06/08/happiness-equality-what/#comment-5935 Wild Pegasus Tue, 21 Jun 2005 02:53:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=729#comment-5935 Whoops, the second and fourth paragraphs in my previous post were supposed to be italicised. I'm quoting monkyboy. - Josh Whoops, the second and fourth paragraphs in my previous post were supposed to be italicised. I’m quoting monkyboy.

- Josh

]]> By: Wild Pegasus http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/06/08/happiness-equality-what/#comment-5934 Wild Pegasus Tue, 21 Jun 2005 02:52:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=729#comment-5934 I'm not sure what's difficult about my point. Libertarians don't care about the distribution of property as long as that distribution is due to just acquisition and just transfer. America is the longest running experiement in capitalism as we understand it. We seem to be going the same way as every other economic system that came before us. I think it would be better to say that the US is going the same way as every political system that went before it. Governments grow in size and power as time goes by, and America is no exception. A group of elites uses the government to protect themselves from competition (both foreign and domestic) and to make sure workers need to keep working long after they could have retired in a free market. Read some of the New Left revisionist history, such as Gabriel Kolko's Triumph of Conservatism. I also suggest Carson's blog and his Studies in Mutualist Political Economy (available on his website). If, in 20 years or so, The top 20% of families are getting 90-95% of all income, do you think libertarians would support government redistribution measures that are counter to everything they believe in? I wouldn't, because that wouldn't solve the root problem. It'd be like a bandage on a gaping wound. The real problem is one group using the government to enrich themselves at the expense of another. And no, I don't mean welfare queens. - Josh I’m not sure what’s difficult about my point. Libertarians don’t care about the distribution of property as long as that distribution is due to just acquisition and just transfer.

America is the longest running experiement in capitalism as we understand it. We seem to be going the same way as every other economic system that came before us.

I think it would be better to say that the US is going the same way as every political system that went before it. Governments grow in size and power as time goes by, and America is no exception. A group of elites uses the government to protect themselves from competition (both foreign and domestic) and to make sure workers need to keep working long after they could have retired in a free market. Read some of the New Left revisionist history, such as Gabriel Kolko’s Triumph of Conservatism. I also suggest Carson’s blog and his Studies in Mutualist Political Economy (available on his website).

If, in 20 years or so, The top 20% of families are getting 90-95% of all income, do you think libertarians would support government redistribution measures that are counter to everything they believe in?

I wouldn’t, because that wouldn’t solve the root problem. It’d be like a bandage on a gaping wound. The real problem is one group using the government to enrich themselves at the expense of another. And no, I don’t mean welfare queens.

- Josh

]]> By: monkyboy http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/06/08/happiness-equality-what/#comment-5933 monkyboy Mon, 20 Jun 2005 12:36:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=729#comment-5933 I'm not quite sure I get your point, Josh. America is the longest running experiement in capitalism as we understand it. We seem to be going the same way as every other economic system that came before us. The rich are getting richer is a cliche for a reason. If, in 20 years or so, The top 20% of families are getting 90-95% of all income, do you think libertarians would support government redistribution measures that are counter to everything they believe in? I’m not quite sure I get your point, Josh.

America is the longest running experiement in capitalism as we understand it. We seem to be going the same way as every other economic system that came before us.

The rich are getting richer is a cliche for a reason. If, in 20 years or so, The top 20% of families are getting 90-95% of all income, do you think libertarians would support government redistribution measures that are counter to everything they believe in?

]]> By: Wild Pegasus http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/06/08/happiness-equality-what/#comment-5932 Wild Pegasus Mon, 20 Jun 2005 02:28:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=729#comment-5932 It isn't a problem so long as it's consistent with market distribution. Unfortunately, we are far from that, and many of us have every reason to expect that freer markets mean less disparity in wealth distribution. For a different perspective on libertarianism, try anarcho-mutualist Kevin Carson's website: <a href="http://mutualist.blogspot.com." rel="nofollow">http://mutualist.blogspot.com.</a> - Josh It isn’t a problem so long as it’s consistent with market distribution. Unfortunately, we are far from that, and many of us have every reason to expect that freer markets mean less disparity in wealth distribution. For a different perspective on libertarianism, try anarcho-mutualist Kevin Carson’s website: http://mutualist.blogspot.com.

- Josh

]]> By: monkyboy http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/06/08/happiness-equality-what/#comment-5931 monkyboy Sat, 18 Jun 2005 03:31:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=729#comment-5931 I feel like Brad Pitt in "Troy"...are there no "libertarians" who will answer my question? Or do none of you feel that the top 20% of families getting 99% of the income pie constitutes a problem? And Josh, your comment has nothing to do with mine, I wasn't suggesting a tax, just pointing out the top quintile has 12 times the average income of the bottom quintile. I feel like Brad Pitt in “Troy”…are there no “libertarians” who will answer my question? Or do none of you feel that the top 20% of families getting 99% of the income pie constitutes a problem?

And Josh, your comment has nothing to do with mine, I wasn’t suggesting a tax, just pointing out the top quintile has 12 times the average income of the bottom quintile.

]]> By: Wild Pegasus http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/06/08/happiness-equality-what/#comment-5930 Wild Pegasus Sat, 18 Jun 2005 02:32:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=729#comment-5930 Your question had no bearing on my comments, nor does it address economic law, so I ignored it. Here's a kleenex. - Josh Your question had no bearing on my comments, nor does it address economic law, so I ignored it. Here’s a kleenex.

- Josh

]]> By: monkyboy http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/06/08/happiness-equality-what/#comment-5929 monkyboy Thu, 16 Jun 2005 18:24:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=729#comment-5929 I notice you dodged my question, Josh. What percentage of income going to the top 20% of families do you consider a problem? If current trends continue, they will be at about 75% around 2010... Across the globe and back through history, a strong middle class indicates a strong country. We are losing ours. Not sure if it's a chicken and egg kinda thing, but it is troublesome. I notice you dodged my question, Josh.

What percentage of income going to the top 20% of families do you consider a problem? If current trends continue, they will be at about 75% around 2010…

Across the globe and back through history, a strong middle class indicates a strong country. We are losing ours. Not sure if it’s a chicken and egg kinda thing, but it is troublesome.

]]> By: Wild Pegasus http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/06/08/happiness-equality-what/#comment-5928 Wild Pegasus Thu, 16 Jun 2005 18:13:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=729#comment-5928 <em>An 8% tax on the top quintile transferred to the bottom quintile would double the income of the bottom quintile</em> That's Bad Economics 101 right there. - Josh An 8% tax on the top quintile transferred to the bottom quintile would double the income of the bottom quintile

That’s Bad Economics 101 right there.

- Josh

]]> By: monkyboy http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/06/08/happiness-equality-what/#comment-5927 monkyboy Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:39:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=729#comment-5927 Hehe, bad economics. I was just pointing that rich Americans are getting a huge slice o' the pie these days. It's so bad, the Republicans stopped publishing income distribution numbers after their 2003 giveaways. In 2002 the wealthies 20% of American families got 55% of income...bet it's over 60% now. Just out of curiousity, what number would indicate a problem to those in the "let them eat cake crowd?," 70%...80%...90%...100%? Hehe, bad economics.

I was just pointing that rich Americans are getting a huge slice o’ the pie these days. It’s so bad, the Republicans stopped publishing income distribution numbers after their 2003 giveaways. In 2002 the wealthies 20% of American families got 55% of income…bet it’s over 60% now.

Just out of curiousity, what number would indicate a problem to those in the “let them eat cake crowd?,” 70%…80%…90%…100%?

]]> By: Wild Pegasus http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2005/06/08/happiness-equality-what/#comment-5926 Wild Pegasus Tue, 14 Jun 2005 17:35:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=729#comment-5926 No one should find it surprising that material things don't make us happy. We humans have been evolving along a separate line from the rest of the Great Apes for longer than 3 million years. Until about 10,000 years ago or so, none of us had hardly anything. Happiness wasn't found in material things in our evolutionary past because there were no material things to make us happy. I'm not surprised that we are happy, briefly, when we get something new but pretty soon find it mundane. On another tack, happiness isn't necessarily a good indicator of what we should do. After all, it would make me happy to beat to a living pulp the guy who cracks his gum behind me in the movie theatre. That doesn't make it right. If people are unhappy because others have more than they do, and it makes them happy to tear those with more down, that doesn't tell me whether it's the right thing to do or not. Envy is one of the seven deadly sins, after all. Monkyboy makes a good point about how some of the rich get their wealth, one that matches my distinction between happiness and correctness. Of course, his economics is atrocious zero-sum nonsense. - Josh No one should find it surprising that material things don’t make us happy. We humans have been evolving along a separate line from the rest of the Great Apes for longer than 3 million years. Until about 10,000 years ago or so, none of us had hardly anything. Happiness wasn’t found in material things in our evolutionary past because there were no material things to make us happy. I’m not surprised that we are happy, briefly, when we get something new but pretty soon find it mundane.

On another tack, happiness isn’t necessarily a good indicator of what we should do. After all, it would make me happy to beat to a living pulp the guy who cracks his gum behind me in the movie theatre. That doesn’t make it right. If people are unhappy because others have more than they do, and it makes them happy to tear those with more down, that doesn’t tell me whether it’s the right thing to do or not. Envy is one of the seven deadly sins, after all.

Monkyboy makes a good point about how some of the rich get their wealth, one that matches my distinction between happiness and correctness. Of course, his economics is atrocious zero-sum nonsense.

- Josh

]]>