UKIP Interview

[doodab]

anyone != everyone.

It isn't me you need to explain that to. I'm the one who argues that we need a more equal society so that everyone can enjoy the benefits and not just those who succeed wildly.

It is amazing isn't it, how one little word can change peoples perception. Say these people deserve to live in a more equal society and you're slagged off as a lefty / socialist / whatever, but say they have failed and everyone jumps to their defense

[DodgyAgent]

It isn't me you need to explain that to. I'm the one who argues that we need a more equal society so that everyone can enjoy the benefits and not just those who succeed wildly.

It is amazing isn't it, how one little word can change peoples perception. Say these people deserve to live in a more equal society and you're slagged off as a lefty / socialist / whatever, but say they have failed and everyone jumps to their defense

Of course you will get slagged off because most people associate your words with redistribution of wealth from rich to poor. This is fine as long as it is redistributed effectively and it does not kill off the golden goose.

[doodab]

Of course you will get slagged off because most people associate your words with redistribution of wealth from rich to poor.

Amazing how they continue to do so even when one points out repeatedly that one is talking about more even distribution of the spoils to begin with. One might even conclude they aren't actually paying attention.

[doodab]

This is fine as long as it is redistributed effectively and it does not kill off the golden goose.

It's odd how rarely those who are happy to see the spoils of economic growth distributed mainly to the rich apply the same considerations. And this despite the fact that hugely unequal societies invariably implode in internal chaos and revolution.

[DodgyAgent]

Amazing how they continue to do so even when one points out repeatedly that one is talking about more even distribution of the spoils to begin with. One might even conclude they aren't actually paying attention.

The "spoils" are not a finite entity. They grow and fall according to economic activity.

[doodab]

The "spoils" are not a finite entity. They grow and fall according to economic activity.

Indeed. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be distributed equally though.

I'm really talking about distribution of income rather than accrued wealth. The problem there is that an unequal distribution of accrued wealth results in an unequal distribution of newly created wealth, so you end up with an even more uneven distribution of accrued wealth with each successive generation.

It's quite similar to the way that gravity results in the creation of stars and galaxies and vast regions of empty space as the universe evolves even though the distribution of matter (or energy) started out almost completely uniform. That leads me to conclude that there is no point simply redistributing accrued wealth because you will inevitably end up with a highly skewed distribution in a few generations. You need to fix the mechanism that distributes the newly created wealth, perhaps my making it less dependent on the existing distribution of wealth.

[DodgyAgent]

Indeed. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be distributed equally though.

If they were "they" would disappear or do you not study economics or history?

The harsh realities of human nature are that in order to stimulate wealth creation you must first give people the opportunity to earn enormous riches, the next thing you do is to encourage them to make even more and then keep it in your country

Chart of the week: Why billionaires love London - MoneyWeek

Unless of course you want to redistribute your earnings UK incomes: how does your salary compare? | Money | theguardian.com

I am sure you would be morally driven to work overtime hours knowing that the money you earned would go towards creating an equal society

[d000hg]

At least Farage and UKIP are talking about policies instead of stage managing their presentation

It's much easier to present very detailed policies when there is absolutely no risk you'll be asked to implement them.

[DodgyAgent]

It's much easier to present very detailed policies when there is absolutely no risk you'll be asked to implement them.

It most certainly is ... so what?

[doodab]

If they were they would disappear or do you not study economics or history?

Would that be the economics & history where hugely unequal economies based on slavery and feudalism have eventually collapsed time and again over the entirety of human history?

By far the biggest rises in standard of living have occurred during the agricultural revolution and the industrial revolution. In the later case the distribution of the spoils of growth, while certainly not equal, was considerably more equal than what went before. It created the middle class from those who they had access to the new sources of wealth creation.

The point here is that it's by no means a given that economic growth has to result in an increase in inequality, and by being innovative we can do something that both creates a more equal society and increases overall wealth considerably.