[squirrelicus]

I'm not on board for designing economy based on the happiness levels of the envious. Besides, the literature is clear that rising in status has very little long term impact on happiness.

Edit: it kinda goes like this

"I'm not happy because i don't make enough money"

"Here's some money"

"I'm not happy because i don't make enough money"

"Here's some money"

"I'm not happy because i don't make enough money"

"Ummm.... Maybe you should find a better metric for meaning in your life, because we're getting nowhere."

Beyond a certain point, which appears to be "bill collectors aren't knocking down your door", more money does nothing for your mental health. Look up Jordan Peterson to find the non-controversial reasons why.

Edit 2: the great tragedy of the leftist economic designer seems to be that subsidizing the poor seems to have no effect. If you do that, the labor costs of goods rises to meet it. So all you did is eat into already-narrow profit margins to, at best, raise prices for everybody including the middle class, or at worse, kill local small businesses.

The real darkly funny part about this whole thing is that, in America, controlling for factors like disability, poor individuals don't stay poor very long. You work hard, you're not poor for much longer. If you don't work hard, you're poor forever.

Edit 3: I often hear a politician say a thing that's false, that people "can't get ahead". It might be true that they can't get ahead as fast as they would like. But so what? We can't fix that problem. Literally, it's not possible. How fast you get ahead is a function of how hard you work. That's how capitalism works.

[krapht]

It's a complicated subject. I think you're too quick to dismiss income redistribution based on the happiness levels of the envious: this is a fundamental part of human nature. Just as we exploit human greed in our capitalistic society, so too we must mollify human envy so there aren't riots in the street. Uncontrolled wealth inequality leads to a breakdown in the egalitarian ideal (or fiction, if you are more cynical) we have of our Western society. Insofar as wealth represents power and influence, this was a topic of concern even to the Founding Fathers.

Status seeking is something you see in all animals, not just humans, and we shouldn't deny the effects of it on happiness. Trying to make social policy without considering it is ignoring a valuable piece of information.

I make no comment on the effectiveness of the US' current social safety net and income redistribution policies. Just that there is a principled argument for having them.