It's not "poorer society with fewer inequalities." That's what they always say. It's never that. A society is not "richer" because the amount of financially backed power is one concentrated set of hands.
That's it. That's the tweet.
[–] azan_ 1 day ago
[–] tikimcfee 1 day ago
> Would you rather have richer (in real terms) society (including richer lowest decile) with larger wealth inequality or poorer society with smaller inequalities?
My point is that those are not the only options. You don't make some more people richer such that there's more inequality. That doesn't make sense. You raise everyone up simultaneously by distributing in a rational measured way. I think maybe you're saying "bigger middle class"? If so, then no, I'd rather say, "no classes, what's the point. We know how to distribute and logistically solve these problems."
[–] azan_ 1 day ago
No, see, that doesn't make sense. If you "distribute in a rational measured way" you have central planning. And central planning indeed reduces inequality but also makes everyone much poorer. Inequalities are natural consequences of free market and meritocracy. Free market and meritocracy is what's best for economic growth. And with economic growth EVERY decile gets richer.
No, you don't get it. Read again my post - I've explicately said that EVERY decile is richer.