Re:Job polarisation and the decline of middle-class workers’...
by yummyfajitas on Thursday February 13, 2014 @02:12PM
(#7233502)
Spam and pollution both impose negative externalities. Are you arguing that the primary mode by which people become wealthy is by generating externalities?
Also, Log(consumption) is a much better measure than Log(income) - a 1000 dollar bill doesn't make you happy, it's the hookers and cocaine you buy with it that does.
Re:Job polarisation and the decline of middle-class workers’...
by Retric on Thursday February 13, 2014 @03:39PM
(#7234132)
I do think most wealth accumulation causes both negative externalities and positive ones. But, my point was wealth accumulation is not inherently a virtue. Sure curing a disease or building the next Google is great, but you can also make a lot of money squatting domains etc. We often whitewash the rich but the sad truth of it is people are people and no large group is going to be limited to good or bad people.
Also, unspent wealth buys piece of mind which is can make you happy. AKA, I would much rather have 100,000$ in my bank account than 100$. Really log(income) still understates things as lifestyle changes more going from 20,000$ to 40,000$ income vs 20,000,000 income to 40,000,000 income.
PS: I think the amount of money entertainers can make is probably inherently detrimental to society. But, that's another debate entirely.
The amount of resources it takes to make someone happier is non linear, so maximizing total wealth is a poor way to measure the health of a society. Realistically Log(income) is probably a much better measure.
Granted, the economy is not a zero sum game. However, at a practical level simply accumulating wealth is often a zero or even negative sum game. EX: Spam, Pollution, etc.