|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,483 Year: 3,740/9,624 Month: 611/974 Week: 224/276 Day: 64/34 Hour: 1/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Unjust Deserts - Gar Alperovitz & Lew Daly | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
In Unjust Deserts: How the Rich are Taking our Common Inheritance, Gar Alperovitz and Lew Daly present the argument that the wealth of the modern worldheld largely by a small percentage of the populationis almost entirely attributable to the history of human civilization and philosophical and technological innovation.
From the invention of the wheel to the development of current information technologies and infrastructures, the fundamental underpinnings of modern progress owe their existence not the the efforts of those in the modern world but to the efforts of those in the past. In this sense, the wealth derived through use of these essential components of development is 'unearned' by anyone living today. The contributions to wealth creation of each generation are small compared to the contribution of the past taken as a whole, and so the percentage of any individual's income that can be said to have been earned is exceptionally small. Instead, Alperovitz and Daly argue, the wealth that comes through the use of technologies and institutions developed in the past represents a "common inheritance", unearned by anyone living today though bestowed on our generation as a free gift from the past. Thus, it is only equitable that this common inheritance be commonly shared by all members of society equally. The modern entrepreneur played no role in the development of the alphabet, the printing press, the adding machine, and most of the other technologies that form the backbone of his inventions and thus the wealth they bring. All the wealth attributable to these developments is unearned by himas, indeed, it is unearned by anyone living today. What then, other than injustice, entitles him to sole enjoyment of this wealth in the stead of millions of others who worked just as hard not earning it? This is the topic at the center of Unjust Deserts. Though lacking in original ideasthe work is essentially (and ironically) a drawn-out book reviewthe author's deserve due credit for their effort in bringing the important ideas they discuss to the access of the general public. It's worth a read for anyone living with the delusion of the self-made man; the authors make it clear that most of what makes the man the man did not make. JonLove your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
The modern entrepreneur played no role in the development of the alphabet, the printing press, the adding machine, and most of the other technologies that form the backbone of his inventions and thus the wealth they bring. All the wealth attributable to these developments is unearned by himas, indeed, it is unearned by anyone living today. What then, other than injustice, entitles him to sole enjoyment of this wealth in the stead of millions of others who worked just as hard not earning it? The ability to apply technology in a way that will successfully provide him with more wealth. Its not entitlement. Its going out and doing what you need to do in order to obtain what you want.
the authors make it clear that most of what makes the man the man did not make. But we're all in that boat. Some people do better in it than others. Not everyone has the same privileges and opportunities, though, as life is just not fair.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10045 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
But we're all in that boat. Some people do better in it than others. Not everyone has the same privileges and opportunities, though, as life is just not fair. The problem is that people are going out of their way to make it unfair. While middle class families are paying around 30% income tax, the uber-rich are paying 10 to 15%. The rich also spend money on politicians that reduce public spending, resulting in fewer educational and employment opportunities for the middle class. The rich spend money on politicians that bust unions, leading directly to the depression of middle class incomes and putting more money in the pockets of the the people who own the companies.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10045 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Thus, it is only equitable that this common inheritance be commonly shared by all members of society equally. The modern entrepreneur played no role in the development of the alphabet, the printing press, the adding machine, and most of the other technologies that form the backbone of his inventions and thus the wealth they bring. All the wealth attributable to these developments is unearned by himas, indeed, it is unearned by anyone living today. What then, other than injustice, entitles him to sole enjoyment of this wealth in the stead of millions of others who worked just as hard not earning it? My initial question is how can we have fair profits while keeping incentives in place to encourage innovation? Also, we do put expiration dates on copyrights and patents. However, I have heard that loopholes and questionable justifications have taken the teeth out of this process. If so, are there reforms that need to be put in place?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
My initial question is how can we have fair profits while keeping incentives in place to encourage innovation? And that's a good question. I still have the last several pages to read. I hope the authors address the question there; so far the book has just been a discussion of previous writings on the topic. A couple proposals not originating with the authors are cited:
quote: quote: A few other proposals are cited, but these seem to be the theme of most of them.
Also, we do put expiration dates on copyrights and patents. But the expiration dates are ridiculous. Roughly two generations (in addition to the original author) can benefit from the copyright or patent despite having done absolutely nothing to earn that benefit. And that is just the crux of the argument in Unjust Deserts: the current system is highly biased toward rewarding non-contributors and rewarding them far too handsomely.Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
The ability to apply technology in a way that will successfully provide him with more wealth. Knowing how to get rich is not the same as deserving to be rich.Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
The problem is that people are going out of their way to make it unfair. Got an example?
While middle class families are paying around 30% income tax, the uber-rich are paying 10 to 15%. According to the Congressional Budget Office:
quote: Where did you get your numbers?
The rich also spend money on politicians... Politics has always been about money. That's really the only thing it is about.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Knowing how to get rich is not the same as deserving to be rich. Deserving? That's not even a factor that is in the equation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes:
Dillinger did that.
Its going out and doing what you need to do in order to obtain what you want.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Catholic Scientist writes:
Dillinger did that. Its going out and doing what you need to do in order to obtain what you want. Sure, and he obtained some wealth. But since it was obtained illegally, the FBI hunted him down. Edited by Catholic Scientist, : syntax error
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Catholic Scientist writes:
Isn't that what the OP is advocating? Making it illegal to steal more than your share?
But since it was obtained illegally, the FBI hunted him down.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Isn't that what the OP is advocating? Making it illegal to steal more than your share? I didn't see it. It says that since we all are riding on the coat tails of past invented technology, then people who have utilized that technology to obtain wealth don't really deserve it. I didn't see any mention of making anything illegal.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes:
Well, you quoted this from the OP:
I didn't see any mention of making anything illegal.quote:Notice the word "injustice"? Doesn't changing injustice to justice suggest changing the law? I'm just saying that Dillinger used technology for his own ends in the same way that entrepreneurs use technology for their own ends. The only difference is a legal technicality.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Notice the word "injustice"? Doesn't changing injustice to justice suggest changing the law? I suppose it could. I didn't really read it that way, and they don't really offer any suggestions. Its an injustice that some poor kid had to be born into a starving family in Africa while I get to sit here eating cheese and grapes. Recognizing that as an injustice doesn't mean I'm suggesting that we make some law about it. But I do see how you read it that way.
I'm just saying that Dillinger used technology for his own ends in the same way that entrepreneurs use technology for their own ends. The only difference is a legal technicality. Yeah, I get that. That's how our world works. That's what I was saying; nobody is going to give you anything, regardless of what is deserved, you have to go out and get what you want. If you want to do that illegally, then you may face the legal consequences. If you do it legally, you can obtain wealth and live your life. But sitting around calling it an injustice and saying the people who have obtained wealth don't deserve it doesn't really accomplish anything. If you want there to be changes, you have to go out and make changes. Us sitting around discussing how unfair life is, is a waste of time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes:
That may be a philosophical injustice but the OP talks about entitlement, which is a more concrete legal injustice.
Its an injustice that some poor kid had to be born into a starving family in Africa while I get to sit here eating cheese and grapes. Catholic Scientist writes:
It does if it's the first step in doing something about it. The intention of the OP (and the book) seems to be to increase awareness that the rich are not morally entitled to their riches even if they are legally entitled.
But sitting around calling it an injustice and saying the people who have obtained wealth don't deserve it doesn't really accomplish anything. Catholic Scientist writes:
Well, I'm trying to increase the awareness of the right-wing nuts on the forum.
Us sitting around discussing how unfair life is, is a waste of time.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024