All about pies

The last thing you want to read on a Sunday morning is a letter that sends your blood pressure rocketing. Take this one [Voice of the People Feb. 27  CH] Here are some excerpts with our added links:

Choose fairness

We often hear the complaint that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. The richest one per cent in Canada receives 14 per cent of the income. This percentage continues to grow. This is ridiculously unfair to everyone else. This trend threatens democracy.

Some have said that our money system could be compared to a system where tickets are given out in uneven amounts to large numbers of people. … Some people are given a lot of tickets, some a few, and some hardly any.

If we all had a say in how these tickets were given out, we would never give 14 per cent of the tickets to one per cent of the people. …

We can rectify this by repealing these mistakes. The resulting savings could be used to help reduce government debt. …

The compassionate writer has fallen for the zero – sum fallacy.

The Zero-Sum Game is possibly the most pervasive of the economic fallacies. Well-meaning Christians [or well meaning Humanists Ww] see people in poverty and decide that the answer is to shift more wealth from the rich to the poor.

Where does the money come from? Does the government have a money tree in the back yard from which they can distribute the harvest?  No, eventually, they get it from those who CREATE  and expand wealth.

The issue is not that the wealthy have taken from the poor but that the poor have nothing to trade in the economy.

More

They are always surprised …  people aren’t stupid…. you are left with a lot of people who don’t produce and then…

Bake your own pie …

Advertisements

4 responses to “All about pies

  1. I think that the empirical evidence is that a very flat distribution of wealth kills an economy as does a distribution that become too unequal. The problem is, no one (to my knowledge) has figured out the optimal distribution, assuming such a thing exists.

    • Distribution of wealth? Unequal distribution? How can you distribute what is not yours. That implies that one person or entity has control of the wealth. In a free society where exchanges are made to mutual benefit trades cannot be unequal, or why would you make them? Force maybe – as in a hold up or blackmail.

      • I was using distribution in the descriptive sense of a probability density function. Trade is a bit like gas molecules bouncing around — the molecules don’t all have the same energy, although they do have a well-known statistical distribution that is a result of the underlying dynamics. My point was that the underlying dynamics of an economy are not a trivial thing to mess around with — which is why I’m nervous about excessive regulation and excessive taxation.

        Sorry, I was a bit obscure… (OK, very obscure.)

      • I like the idea of trade and exchange but dislike the term distribution. I think politicians forget that we, the taxpayers, are supposed to benefit from the exchange. I think they have the idea that they have the right to take money from us and then spend it, distribute it, as they like. Words do shape and also reveal thinking.