Economic Inequality Debates

You're both arguing against a straw man (no one in this thread has even hinted that wealth redistribution is an "all-powerful curative"), and belittling people by implying that their reasoning is based on what "feels good" rather than logic and empiricism.It would make HN better if you tried to make more substantive arguments for your position.

No, it mean complaining about people having too much and people having too little. It might sound strange for you, but lots of people discuss economics/politics for a greater social good, not their own personal interest.

I think you're misunderstanding.I'm making a joke about the fact that it's starting to feel like neoliberalism is just a hand wavy way for rich people to continue to get rich at the expense of everyone else.I have no issue with the article, just the opposite. Studies like these are demonstrating how we shouldn't assume popular economic theories are immune to scrutiny.

The answer is: nothing. The whole argument is predicated on a political conviction, not an economic reality.

These are criticisms people say on the streets, and they vague, empty and lack explanation. Although I also find your answers vague and empty, it's nice that you tried to answer them.Anyway, I think it is safe to ignore that discussion, because it is way too common and biased.My humble suggestion is that you should start on the purely economic side of the high-level discussion. This[1] is something that raised a lot of discussion (pro and against the socialist side) between top econom

I get the feeling this was a glib example interest/amusement not to be take as an economic truism. And I suggest if you going to jump on any statement an claim its wrong, include information to back up your assertion. I like to think HN comments add value and we don't encourage taking easy pot shots at comments. For that reason I gave you a downvote, and also took the time to explain why I feel that was needed.

You clearly aren't discussing in good faith if your response to the write up above is essentially "right wing thought detected, opinion rejected."What an excellent demonstration of shutting off factual information to support your own biases.- You know nothing about the CA housing market vs income and income tax, or my personal situation, but you simply assume I'm lying.- You're intentionally sticking your head in the sand because you think the paper is from a &q

It isn't "talking shit", what he's saying is broadly true and you're not doing poor people any favors by pretending otherwise.

You're referring to "trickle-down economics" which is largely bunk.

"The plain fact is that from an economic point of view"Thats a different discussion than the one I read the parent talking about.