[TheAdamAndChe]

> on the other hand, that six individuals have the power to control how their money is distributed is a very real problem, but the wealth itself isn't.

I wouldn't say the wealth is the problem, but wealth inequality is. Our current system allows for a few people to make millions of dollars a day while others can't even get jobs or afford a house. A certain amount of inequality is required to incentivize high performers to create more, but the current amount of inequality is obscene.

[socmag]

Again, I get where you are coming from, but then there is this:

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-hU7LNS3S3F0/UgQM8LZeTuI/A...

It shows Shanghai in 1987 vs 2013

From a humanist angle, those buildings are outrageous monstrosities and monuments to human egos. However, they were built from wealth generation that probably gave farmers in paddy fields the opportunity to be elevated out of relative poverty to positions where they could gain an education and likely some are now right here with us on HN.

Likely it was all paid for by your average WalMart / Apple / Amazon shopper.

A deeper question is if we feel this is money well spent, and skyscrapers as legacies certainly didn't start in China and are quite prevalent in the West as well.

Taxing the hell out of frivolous luxury goods might be a jolly good start but dunno if that's going to fly anytime soon because even that is a subjective call at best.

Boo, tricky stuff :/

[TheAdamAndChe]

China has been aggressively industrializing since the 70's and their work is paying off, while America has been aggressively deindustrializing, shipping all the work overseas, gutting the middle class, all so the upper class can benefit from the cheaper labor. The global economy means nothing to me when I can't get a job.

If globalization doesn't help everyone of a country, it will lead to widespread disdain for globalization and eventually the reversal of the policies. If globalization is so important to create a more prosperous world, then we need to find a more sustainable way of doing it.

[socmag]

"The global economy means nothing to me when I can't get a job."

Yeah I'll buy that, but the global economy is what gave you the computer that you are using to type that message on and it makes your groceries cheaper when you go to QFC.

We certainly do need to find a better way of doing it, because we can't all be big data scientists, drone operators and bartenders. Thumbs up to that

[golergka]

> the current amount of inequality is obscene

Can you back this opinion up with some arguments?

[TheAdamAndChe]

I'm arguing that inequality at the moment is obscene. Here[1][2][3][4] are some sources backing up my claim.

Basically, inequality is massive and accelerating. It's hurting the lower and middle classes to the point that small business creation is slowing down a lot[5]. Seeing how a lot of people are employed in small businesses(49% of private sector workforce[6]), it's acting as a real drag on our economy, keeping wages down and making inequality even higher.

[1] http://inequality.org/wealth-inequality/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_Unite... [3] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/05/21/the-t... [4] http://fortune.com/2015/09/30/america-wealth-inequality/ [5] http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/08/news/economy/us-startups-nea... [6] http://www.inc.com/jared-hecht/are-small-businesses-really-t...

[socmag]

There is no doubt that there is inequality and that inequality is accelerating, especially in the US and West.

What's the global picture look like? I mean we do want our fellow humans to do well too, right?

Maybe not spending so many $$$ on things that go boom might be a good start and instead bomb places with broadband connections, social media, las-vegas strip clubs and NetFlix.

At least that would generate US jobs and still be educational and to all our benefits to some degree.