Income Inequality.

[Pete in Panama]

Are we living on the same planet?

lol!!

ok, I don't remember your thoughts here yet, where do u stand?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

lol!!

ok, I don't remember your thoughts here yet, where do u stand?

Thoughts? I've worked myself to the operating room without even getting above the poverty line for it.

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

This is the key to the entire discussion Virtually everyone I've talked to on this subject says they don't demand equality of income, but they just want incomes to me "less" unequal. That is insane. Numbers are either equal or they are not equal. There is no mathematical description of numbers being sort of equal. They can be say, within 20%. Please think about this, how would you describe what u want w/ incomes. Please describe the incomes in a manner that anyone else can look and understand what u want.

I don't like the idea of a required income, honestly. I wouldn't mind having machines or drones doing most of the labor jobs, stipend everyone with basic necessities. If they want luxuries or comforts, there is where income would take a role and give people something to achieve or work for and individualize themselves in the process.

Basically, I want to live in the 'galactic empire' sci fi trope. The benevolent one please, or like the United Federation of Planets. (Star Trek)

We can't, as a species, pull off anything remotely resembling socialism for one reason or another, so that's not the solution. Perhaps if we kept people out of the distribution of resources, had it automated with a machine learning Ai system running the show?

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

Thoughts? I've worked myself to the operating room without even getting above the poverty line for it.

I'd talk to the Surgeon General, if I were you!

 

[Heyo]

--and the only way to know the case to case relationship is to know every single income for every single person. Ain't gonna happen.

No, but that's no excuse. There are a lot of mathematical tools with differing granularity. E.g. averages over brackets.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

This is the key to the entire discussion Virtually everyone I've talked to on this subject says they don't demand equality of income, but they just want incomes to me "less" unequal. That is insane. Numbers are either equal or they are not equal. There is no mathematical description of numbers being sort of equal. They can be say, within 20%. Please think about this, how would you describe what u want w/ incomes. Please describe the incomes in a manner that anyone else can look and understand what u want.

Yeah, equal as a word refers to several kinds of cognition and evaluation.
But not according to you. All cognition is about the numerical value as the numerical value and nothing else.
So for that is insane, what is the numerical value of insane?

I will explain to you, what you do. You evaluate using two standards of value. Quantity and quality, but you don't notice that you use quality in some of your thinking. The joke is that insane has no numerical quanity, but is a quality.
So your rule is this: For the quality of making sense I only accept quantity and that is the correct way of thinking, because I say so.
But that is insane, because it is not a quantity.
So your post is insane because I say so and your value is -1 for your numerical value as for your thinking and to thinking differently about that is insane, because I say so. But that is also insane.

But the joke is that your bold claim can't be doubted, right? But other kinds of cognition than yours can, because of your reasons.

 

[exchemist]

--and the only way to know the case to case relationship is to know every single income for every single person. Ain't gonna happen. We have to start somewhere. Either you pick something u can work w/ or you say you don't know and u sit and listen to others spouting what u consider to be garbage.

So we're back to the fact that we need to start somewhere. Look, if you can't decide where that somewhere is then how can you possibly participate?

That’s obviously nonsense. It is perfectly possible to analyse or estimate the income distribution across the population and it is almost certainly done as a matter of routine by economic analysts. Certainly in my country (UK) such numbers are readily available. Here is an example: http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44188000/gif/_44188235_uk_income_dist2_gr416.gif

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

That’s obviously nonsense. It is perfectly possible to analyse or estimate the income distribution across the population and it is almost certainly done as a matter of routine by economic analysts. Certainly in my country (UK) such numbers are readily available. Here is an example: http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44188000/gif/_44188235_uk_income_dist2_gr416.gif

We have a consensus in the US, he has used it as a source a couple of times, I believe. I don't see why it couldn't be used for this purpose, especially considering the level development of computing and AI we have achieved...

Edit: The consensus only counts residences and their occupants, so there are a number of people living on the street and transients it can't count. Not to mention the people here illegally. On the topic of the thread, it does not count those without a job as 'unemployed' unless they are currently collecting unemployment benefits.


Regarding AI:
It's my opinion that we develop an 'Algorithmic Intelligence' system, and employ it to monitor resource acquisition, production, and consumption. It could reduce and redistribute overages to sectors it's needed. Completely overhaul the efficiency of a nation, bolstering its economic influence and evaporating its ecological footprint.

 

[Pete in Panama]

Thoughts? I've worked myself to the operating room without even getting above the poverty line for it.

whoa, NEAT!

 

[Pete in Panama]

I don't like the idea of a required income, honestly. I wouldn't mind having machines or drones doing most of the labor jobs, stipend everyone with basic necessities. If they want luxuries or comforts, there is where income would take a role and give people something to achieve or work for and individualize themselves in the process.

Basically, I want to live in the 'galactic empire' sci fi trope. The benevolent one please, or like the United Federation of Planets. (Star Trek)

We can't, as a species, pull off anything remotely resembling socialism for one reason or another, so that's not the solution. Perhaps if we kept people out of the distribution of resources, had it automated with a machine learning Ai system running the show?

Those are all interesting thoughts, and of course putting the ideas into practice would require numbers and steps/phases. Star Trek is my favorite too, we're about at the end of the Picard series. Star Trek economics is absolute nonsense however (mho). Money is so useful and it provides many functions. Gene Rodenberry never really explained how to replace those functions. However today's writers have done a great job of being busy w/ other adventures...

 

[Pete in Panama]

No, but that's no excuse. There are a lot of mathematical tools with differing granularity. E.g. averages over brackets.

the census bur did some stuff w/ quintiles. The problem I ran into w/ them was the fact that the Census beancounters seemed to have an agenda and when I added up the total incomes they fell far short of the BEA total personal incomes. It was like they used just salaries/wages and omited all the rents/transfer payments.

Is that what ur talking about?

 

[Pete in Panama]

Yeah, equal as a word refers to several kinds of cognition and evaluation.
But not according to you. All cognition is about the numerical value as the numerical value and nothing else....

hey, I can be "non-numerical" too! How about we just "say" incomes are already equal enough, and if anyone complains we can fault them for just being too fussy.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

hey, I can be "non-numerical" too! How about we just "say" incomes are already equal enough, and if anyone complains we can fault them for just being too fussy.

Well, I am not your we, but one of them, because I think/feel differently than you. Go figure.

 

[Heyo]

the census bur did some stuff w/ quintiles. The problem I ran into w/ them was the fact that the Census beancounters seemed to have an agenda and when I added up the total incomes they fell far short of the BEA total personal incomes. It was like they used just salaries/wages and omited all the rents/transfer payments.

Is that what ur talking about?

Basically, yes. But one has to be able to read the charts, the details are important.

 

[Pete in Panama]

That’s obviously nonsense. It is perfectly possible to analyse or estimate the income distribution across the population and it is almost certainly done as a matter of routine by economic analysts. Certainly in my country (UK) such numbers are readily available. Here is an example: http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44188000/gif/_44188235_uk_income_dist2_gr416.gif

This is good and what I'm talking about. Here's a similar plot for the U.S.:

https://theglitteringeye.com/images/us-income-distribution.gif

So please tell me if you're objecting to U.S. income distribution and what you'd do to fix it.

 

[Pete in Panama]

Well, I am not your we, but one of them, because I think/feel differently than you. Go figure.

sounds good

 

[Pete in Panama]

Basically, yes. But one has to be able to read the charts, the details are important.

ok, so if you object to U.S. incomes please explain what you'd like better.

 

[exchemist]

This is good and what I'm talking about. Here's a similar plot for the U.S.:

https://theglitteringeye.com/images/us-income-distribution.gif

View attachment 79219

So please tell me if you're objecting to U.S. income distribution and what you'd do to fix it.

My only point was talking about average income, which you had been, is not very helpful. An income distribution curve, like the one you have now posted, is what is needed.

As for improvements, I think the very high incomes should be taxed much more, which would reduce the tax paid lower down. I think more could be done to make the very rich actually pay income tax, instead of sidestepping it. I think minimum employment conditions, and employment security, could be strengthened. I also think the USA would benefit greatly from a health system that is free at the point of use, funded by taxation and, specifically, not linked to employment. I do not think any of these measures would damage the economy, given the low unemployment rate. Whereas I think they would greatly improve the sense of security and freedom from anxiety of the less well off. And that in turn would lead to a more content and less fractious society.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

whoa, NEAT!

What the **** is neat about that? My knees and wrists don't think it's neat.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

This is good and what I'm talking about. Here's a similar plot for the U.S.:

https://theglitteringeye.com/images/us-income-distribution.gif

View attachment 79219

So please tell me if you're objecting to U.S. income distribution and what you'd do to fix it.

That shows a lot of people who aren't close.to the average, which is just under $50,000 which isn't anywhere close to $70,000.