X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable version=3.2.2 Sender: -2.6 (spamval) -- NONE Return-Path: Received: from newman.eecs.umich.edu (newman.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.11]) by boston.eecs.umich.edu (8.12.10/8.13.0) with ESMTP id l7KHYgnd018973 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2007 13:34:43 -0400 Received: from anniehall.mr.itd.umich.edu (mx.umich.edu [141.211.176.130]) by newman.eecs.umich.edu (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7KHUgmF030949 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2007 13:32:38 -0400 Received: FROM newman.eecs.umich.edu (newman.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.11]) BY anniehall.mr.itd.umich.edu ID 46C9CFBD.22F49.4969 ; 20 Aug 2007 13:30:37 -0400 Received: from oshkosh.eecs.umich.edu (oshkosh.eecs.umich.edu [141.212.113.86]) by newman.eecs.umich.edu (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7KHSfTX030409 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 20 Aug 2007 13:28:41 -0400 Received: from oshkosh.eecs.umich.edu (localhost.eecs.umich.edu [127.0.0.1]) by oshkosh.eecs.umich.edu (8.13.8/8.13.0) with ESMTP id l7KHT0uJ001226; Mon, 20 Aug 2007 13:29:00 -0400 Received: from localhost (klochner Æ localhost) by oshkosh.eecs.umich.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) with ESMTP id l7KHT0UL001223; Mon, 20 Aug 2007 13:29:00 -0400 In-Reply-To: <93EC811F-946D-4EA2-ADE3-5D43B46EA65E Æ umich.edu> Message-ID: References: <93EC811F-946D-4EA2-ADE3-5D43B46EA65E Æ umich.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.2 (2007-07-23) on newman.eecs.umich.edu X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.91.1, clamav-milter version 0.91.1 on newman.eecs.umich.edu X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.91.1, clamav-milter version 0.91.1 on newman.eecs.umich.edu X-Virus-Status: Clean Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 13:29:00 -0400 (EDT) To: Dave Morris cc: improvetheworld Æ umich.edu, reeves-hayos Æ umich.edu, reeves-kalkman Æ umich.edu From: Kevin Lochner Subject: Re: mind the gap I have to take issue with Dave Morris re: "Playing the stock market does not contribute to society." Not only does a company's stock price influence its access to capital, but the respective stock prices of all companies provide information about the state of the economy that a ceo or entrepeneur may use in making strategic corporate decisions. Stock prices are determined primarily by people who are "playing the stock market". Investing in new companies does. It's a fine line, but > I think we've gotten too much separation of rich and poor in our society > because of the way our stock market currently operates, and that could use > some correction. I agree that inheritance taxes are good as well, to help > prevent too many generations of people staying rich for free. But we should > try to reign in the various tricks which exist to leverage large sums of cash > into even larger sums via short term tricks in business and stocks without > actually contributing anything. Not only do they take funds from people > with less, they hurt the country overall. > > But he is also correct- there's a wide variance of skill and motivation in > people, so there should be a wide variance in income levels. I'd accept a > factor of 100 variance from top to bottom in salary as a reasonable maximum > in relative value to society that a person could be. Some people bust their > asses continuously to help the world. Some people actively try to live off of > others without contributing anything. I do have a problem with the factor > of 1000 or 10000 variances that sometimes occur, but those are obvious flaws > that are difficult to correct. > > Interesting to consider. :-) > > Dave > > On Aug 20, 2007, at 10:16 AM, Daniel Reeves wrote: > >> We've been debating this essay >> http://www.paulgraham.com/gap.html >> and I thought I'd move it to improvetheworld... >> >> I'll start: Graham is so right! The income gap between the rich and the >> poor is wonderful! >> >> Actually it started more as a debate about the nature of capitalism and >> interest ("why should money 'grow'?"). Here was the gist: >> >> * [the economy] is a zero-sum game, isn't it? >> - no >> >> * those earning money are taking it away, even if only indirectly, from >> other people, no? >> - no, not if you think in terms of wealth (wealth = stuff you want, >> money = way to transfer wealth) >> >> * Or am I totally simplifying the haves vs. the have-nots with my pie >> metaphor? >> - yes, that's precisely the Daddy Model of Wealth! >> >> * Is it THEORETICALLY possible for no one to owe any money at all in this >> world, i.e., that everyone just has money that "grows"? Or does money >> only grow if it is taken away from others? >> - You're right, not possible, but for the opposite reason of what you seem >> to be suggesting. You grow money by giving it to someone (lending it), >> not by taking it away. >> >> It even got a bit heated, along the lines of "Trixie, I don't think it's >> right for you to lash out against capitalistic/yootlicious ideas without >> grokking the answers to your questions [above]". >> >> Oh, and I offered a yootle to the first person who could answer the >> quasiphilosophical question why money *should* grow, with the hint that it >> has to do with human mortality. I believe that's the only reason that >> holds in all circumstances. >> >> In any case, Trixie wanted to resume the debate and this is clearly the >> place to do it! >> >> DO NOT CHANGE THE SUBJECT LINE WHEN YOU REPLY (so it's easy for those not >> interested in this debate to delete the whole thread). >> >> Ok, go! >> Danny >> >> -- >> http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves - - search://"Daniel Reeves" >> >> "Everything that can be invented has been invented." >> -- Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899. >> >> >> > > Dave Morris > cell: 734-476-8769 > http://www-personal.umich.edu/~thecat/ > >