[Manuel_D]

But wealthier people tend to consume more. The top 10% of earners account for~50% of consumer spending. It's more like the low income person pays $5 of sales tax on a $50 pair of shoes, and a high income person pays $50 of sales tax on a $500 pair of shoes.

[popalchemist]

Haven't you read Capital? Marx's core premise which nobody actually working in economics denies is that the nature of wealth is to consolidate in the hands of the few. So while wealthier people may consume more, that does not factor into "fairness" because they are hoarding their wealth, amassing power over others, and using it disproportionately to maximize their pleasure, power, influence, etc at the cost of the suffering of others.

But I take it from your glib comment you'll disagree or deny that.

[graemep]

> Marx's core premise which nobody actually working in economics denies is that the nature of wealth is to consolidate in the hands of the few

the same point is discussed Piketty in Capital in the Twenty-First Century.

[tstrimple]

> Haven't you read Capital?

LOL. Do you actually think that person has read Capital or much of anything economics related? These types of internet arguments don't happen among equally equipped participants. People can just say random shit on the internet it turns out. They do it all the time.

[popalchemist]

I know, my comment is rhetorical. They are clearly talking out of their ass.

[tstrimple]

At what point to we have to stop playing pretend with people who never participate in good faith? I get the argument that there are ignorant observers who might learn something. But I've not actually seen any sort of data to support anything like that.

[popalchemist]

For me it was just about calling out bullshit premises where I see them. I don't mind taking 10 seconds to do it every single time.

Maybe my methods were too subtle here, but the point was simply to illustrate that the OP's comment had no connection to reality, with receipts (citing sources)