psyche_2099 t1_iv4x1ae wrote on November 5, 2022 at 9:47 AM

Reply to comment by Killingagency in [OC] Forbes 2022's Most Philanthropic US Billionaires by row64software

Counterpoint - if that money had been donated, I and everyone else on the planet might be living reasonably comfortably, without the looming spectre of climate change coming to kill us all.

Break it down:

If everyone on the planet had more or less the same base wealth, we'd all be equally comfortable.

Innovation and drive don't come from capital, people are independently innovative, so I imagine it reasonable to think some (not all, but enough) of our creature comforts would exist.

Without the drive for profits, these billionaires wouldn't be ferociously driving their businesses to be profitable, so those companies would be more sustainable and climate change less severe. Plus wealthier people disproportionately emit CO2.

Killingagency t1_iv4zntp wrote on November 5, 2022 at 10:26 AM

We tried running that test globally multiple times it didn't work once.

Innovation comes from competition, plain and simple. Take away the competition and you take away the drive of people for more.

Besides that, it simply doesn't work like you suggest.

Let's imagine your perfect world, we will redistribute all of the wealth among all people equally.

Well the problem is, it would literally take less than an hour for all of that to become unequal. Some people would spend it outright on drugs and alcohol. Others will invest it to create something new thus creating more wealth in some form.

It's the pareto distribution a fundamental "law" that is natural in every single creative domain. The amount of goals scored in NBA? 20% of people have 80% of the goals. Same for articles published, records sold, money earned, etc etc.

You cant fight it. An equal redistribution of wealth is fundamentally not possible.