I love your statistics! I love your graphs!

But… I've got one for you… Ten guys are standing around at a bar. Their average income is $40K/year. In comes Bill Gates. Now they are high-fiving each other because their average income has jumped up to $50M/year.

Statistics! Graphs!, But what do they prove?

Will Wilkinson, you remind me of those Medieval philosophers who argued about the number of teeth in a horses mouth but refused to go out and actually count the teeth in the mouth of a horse outside on the street. Sure, your statistical averages are right, but only a fool thinks that averages tell the whole story. Just like the scholars of the Middle Ages thought truth was discovered purely by discourse and examining their ancient texts. None of them felt the need to test truth. Somehow you feel no need to scratch beneath the surface of your statistics.

People are screaming that they are hurting. Historically high foreclosures are happening. But average income in the US is up, so all is well with the world. We can trust the reported aggregate income, but we can't trust the blood in the streets. Reality is in our theories and our books and not in the mouth of any damn horse!

I love your statistics! I love your graphs!

But… I've got one for you… Ten guys are standing around at a bar. Their average income is $40K/year. In comes Bill Gates. Now they are high-fiving each other because their average income has jumped up to $50M/year.

Statistics! Graphs!, But what do they prove?

Will Wilkinson, you remind me of those Medieval philosophers who argued about the number of teeth in a horses mouth but refused to go out and actually count the teeth in the mouth of a horse outside on the street. Sure, your statistical averages are right, but only a fool thinks that averages tell the whole story. Just like the scholars of the Middle Ages thought truth was discovered purely by discourse and examining their ancient texts. None of them felt the need to test truth. Somehow you feel no need to scratch beneath the surface of your statistics.

People are screaming that they are hurting. Historically high foreclosures are happening. But average income in the US is up, so all is well with the world. We can trust the reported aggregate income, but we can't trust the blood in the streets. Reality is in our theories and our books and not in the mouth of any damn horse!

It simply doesn't get it. It's amazing how many times it has been presented this hard nugget…both here and elsewhere and is still totally incapable of making any type of argument….good or bad…in response.

Mentioning lobbyists and government “failure” as a reason for CEO pay is simply a vague appeal to something you neither seem understand or are able to describe.

You are fixated on lobbyists and favored legislation….yet you never ever wonder if the very system of a large influence government is the problem as it places itself as a priced possession between interest groups fighting back and forth in a tug of war for favoritism. You simply ignore this dynamic.

What purpose for democracy except to level the playing field in a war against classism?

Um, the major purpose of democracy in modern times is and has been to unlevel the playing field, as you yourself have repeatedly pointed out in this thread. So why do you think you can take the same weapon that has historically increased inequality and use it to do the opposite?

You sound sort of like an obsessive gambler, who thinks that if he plays just a few more rounds, he'll make back all his losses, despite his continual losing streak. But he just digs his hole deeper and deeper. Double or nothing! Double or nothing!

If the problem you see is lobbyists paying off politicians to get their favored policies enacted, then perhaps the proper solution is to decrease the size and scope of democracy and government regulations, not increase them.

No my proposed solution is more democracy and better regulation.

Right, and as I just said, and you responded to with this comment, you have been losing the democracy game and the regulations have been protecting the powerful against competition from the weak. Asking for more of the same is… progress?

But lets say we follow your advice to decrease regulation. How do we get there? Please be specific. Who should I vote for?

Don't vote for anyone. Voting is how we got into this mess in the first place. I don't know how you get there from here, but it certainly isn't going to be by voting for the same politicians over and over again.

I think you are wrong because history shows us that unregulated markets are a roller-coster ride of ineffeciency, boom and bust econiomies of corruption and ultimatly result in concentrations of wealth and power

But isn't this exactly what we see in the heavily regulated markets of today? Where are these unregulated markets you speak of?

If all 10 of these guys died tomorrow the economy wouldn't miss a beat. But if the 350,000 median income earners who make as much combined died all at once I suspect our economy would take a significant blow and many of us might notice significant disputations in our daily lives. CLASS WAR!!… LETS GO!!

“Am I correct that 2000-05 real compensation rose at an annual rate averaging 1.1 percent?
How does this performance compare with earlier periods and with other economies?

No it's only true if you include the wages of the top most percent of earners.

http://angrybear.blogspot.com/uploaded_images/l…

And compared to prior times the trend has been worse under Bush.

Graph from Angry Bear;

http://angrybear.blogspot.com/2005/07/labor-com…

Also;

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2005/07/wages_and…

http://angrybear.blogspot.com/uploaded_images/l…

What purpose for democracy except to level the playing field in a war against classism?

Without class war you end up with communism or autocracy or serfdom all of which holds the most precious of resource, human ingenuity, down… stifling innovation, freedom and even economic growth.

So as long as the “upper classes” want to use money and power and the government to gain more the lower classes by all means have every right as well to take it back. Using government as well. Ultimately it's survival of the fittest waged in a social environment.

Libertarianism continues to be irrelevant as it is just not practical and has never and still is not an existing order found in any society.

So absolutely… come on Bill… CLASS WAR!!…… LETS GO!!!…. OOPS there goes one… I'll get him…..awe I couldn't get em.. .he was in a beamer…. CLASS WAR!!! Lets GO!!

Oh and the video link doesn't seem to work but you can still find it on YouTube.

This would make senase if it weren't for the fact of lobbyist throwing all sorts of money at politicians to get favorably policy. The government by it's policies effects the issue of income distribution.

You claimed above that I , …”It likes to criticize libertarians for supporting things that they do in fact oppose,..” Your statement above clearly indicates one of 2 things either you have no problem with people using money to get money from the politicians and the public treasury OR that you don't think such a thing happens. Well or a third thing could be that you believe such lobbying has little to do with income inequality.

So I can only connclude you are an irrational denialist or your actions and beliefs don't square with Libertarian principles in all cases.

I really don't see how people can have the hubris to claim that THIS is an issue for government to deal with…let alone deal with in any constructive way that will not have adverse consequences on business practices with new incentive or behavioral problems.

Perhaps the government should put out its own fires that already burning before trying to start new ones.