[acover]

You suggested exactly that.

Your counter argument to equal pay for equal work was location based pay prevents distortions in local prices.

Most countries want as many rich people as possible. Progressive taxes seem much more effective at combatting inequality.

[eyelidlessness]

> You suggested exactly that.

I not only didn’t, I stated exactly the opposite.

[acover]

> But if you’re anticipating counter-arguments, this glosses over a pretty important one. Regardless of geography, higher income brackets tend to have outsized influence on prices across all income brackets in that region. The more it deviates from the median, the more it distorts local pricing. All of this “rising tide” might eventually “lift boats”, but it depends where all that new capital is flowing and even in the best cases it doesn’t keep up with price inflation.

Please explain what you mean by this then.

[eyelidlessness]

What I mean is that if you’re anticipating counter arguments you should anticipate the arguments you can expect, not the ones you want to advance yourself. Edit: in HN culture this is commonly phrased as “steel man”, but in basic exchange of ideas it’s just taking seriously the weaknesses your position might have. Generally it’s a good way to strengthen your position, if you can take the alternative views seriously.