@wdlindsy Was it Adam Smith, who claimed "trickle-down economics" was real??
it has never, ever, been real:
The reason that the wealthy are wealthy is because they concentrate wealth to themselves.
When you multiply that concentration-of-wealth, you multiply, among their "inferiors", poverty.
That is mathematical fact.
It's been discovered ( by someone who can do real math, not me ) that there is a mathematical rule underlying concentration-of-wealth..
No matter who the original circumstantial-winners of a chaotic economy are,
concentration-of-wealth/multiplication-of-poverty takes root,
& progresses from there.
Always.
*Without force-redistribution,
you get extreme oligarchy, no matter what.*
( that is the mathematical-rule they discovered:
different economic-paradigms only change the speed of it happening,
otherwise it's inevitable.. )
It isn't that that is human-nature,
it is that it is *economic* nature,
given opportunism & narcissism.
Add-in machiavellianism, sociopathy, & systemic-dishonesty,
& there's zero hope of getting any kind of economy which simultaneously rewards what ought be rewarded,
while forcing that all honest lives have a truly-fair chance.
---
The root-problem is that there are 2 fundamental curves, I've found, for wealth-paradigm..
Imagine 2 graphs..
1 of them has a dot in the horizontal-middle of it,
4/5ths up, near the top,
& the line comes from the bottom-left,
hugs the bottom of the graph,
except as it gets close to that dot,
it comes steeply up,
then drops steeply down to hug the bottom, again..
That is the *exclusive-wealth* paradigm, what it looks like, in a graph..
( the actual graph-representation would be numbers-of-people along the x-axis,
with 1-individual at the left,
& 100%-of-the-planet's-population at the right,
& the steep-curve would drop from the left-edge of the graph down toward the bottom, quickly,
so that by the time you've got below 10%-population, there's little economic-resource-per-person left,
real poverty for all,
& the right half of the graph would be nearly-flat, at the bottom )
The other graph?
put a dot in the horizontal-middle,
but low, 1/5th of the way up..
now make a curve which goes from bottom-left-corner to the dot to bottom-right-corner,
but make it like a water-droplet,
so it's convex, so it's "full",
& where it goes through the dot,
instead of coming-vertically-up-to the dot,
then dropping immediately vertically-down,
as the exclusive-wealth paradigm does,
it goes *nearly-horizontally* through the dot,
& very-gradually curves down to left & right..
That is the *inclusive wealth* paradigm..
The thing with the inclusive-wealth paradigm,
is that instead of greater-wallowing-wealth-for-very-few,
greater-success-for-many instead is..
more-good-people-employed-doing-good-work!
( no, this isn't communist-imperialism:
in communist-imperialism it is the communist-party which is the fascist-ruler,
& it's institutional-fascism,
right through.
Leninism's "proletariat dictatorship" on the left,
Rupert Murdoch's remapping of Leninism into "populist dictatorship" of the right.
This instead is meritocracy/meritarchy,
and *responsibilityarchy*, outright.
People who *won't* be upright *don't have any place in this paradigm*.
This isn't something which the state can somehow induce in everybody,
this is, rather, something that a not-for-profit keiretsu organization could, if it were engineered & run properly,
do to become a semi-autonomous-economy,
with everybody in it having sufficient means for living..
The people who couldn't/wouldn't be compatible with it?
Well, there's the *normal* economy for them, right?
Different keiretsu ( each doing this kind of thing its-own-way ),
& outside-of-them-all doing things the traditional parasitic-economy way.
The 2 kinds of economy competing against each-other,
you know? : )
Anyways, because the low-wide-curve paradigm is pinned on as-many-good-people-doing-as-much-good-work-as-possible,
instead of eradicating-all-wealth-from-as-many-as-possible-for-the-maximal-wealth-of-as-few-as-possible parasitism-paradigm,
it's simply a different culture/values-set underpinning it.
Both have their own economy,
on their values..
Anyways, see those 2 curves,
the pointy/narrow parasitism-curve
vs the wide/gentle enabling-curve,
& see it in academia,
see it in the money-economy,
see it in nutrition-throughout-a-population,
see it in responsible-authority-vs-irresponsible-dictatorship..
The contrast between those 2 graphs is profound,
& those 2 graphs *do* represent a contrast between many many different contrasts,
in many many different domains..
Monarchy, oligarchy, moneyarchy, narcissism, physical-bullying, communist-party-fascism, etc, all want the narrow/tall curve, with them at the top..
---
Oh, there's another dimension which needs to be identified,
xor I'm misinforming..
How much time is there for decision to be earned?
0..infinity, right?
the *less* time for a decision to be earned,
the more-vertical the command-hierarchy needs to be.
This is why military is sooo dang hierarchy-oriented, by default..
You *don't have* time to form committees, to allow them to evolve, to allow them to transform into other-committees, to allow them to eventually come to consensus, in some future-generation..
you need decision NOW, see?
Whereas, the *more* time for a decision to be earned,
the more-horizontal the decision-decider-structure can be,
& generational-consensus is about as horizontal as it can get..
So, the narrow/tall curve can pertain to the wealth-distribution xor to the authority-distribution,
*and they are independent dimensions to consider*.
Also, just because decision-making can be more-vertical doesn't automatically mean fascism:
Leaving piloting-this-jetliner to the certified/authorized pilots is vertical-curve, right?
Meritarchy..
Same with managing ecologies..
Same with any regulating-work or authority..
( Venn diagram intersection: )
Responsibility & competence & authority
need to be unitary!
NEVER divorced..
& the fewer there are, in any domain,
who are simultaneously all-3,
the fewer who ought be deciding, in that domain.
Anyone who betrays 1 of those 3 dimensions,
e.g. by driving/piloting while drunk,
*force-remove them immediately*,
to protect the lives of the rest of the people in the domain, right?
---
Anyways, *in the wealth dimension*,
the horizontal-curve produces a longer-term viability for civilization than does the vertical-curve,
by far,
at cost to all personal-narcissism.
In the decision-making dimension,
the curve needs to fit the context,
& amount-of-time-to-make-the-decision is part of what controls that context.
( as an extreme example,
if a decision can wait 1 century,
then *one hell of alot of education* can happen in the mean time, right?
So, the Competence dimension could get expanded by a factor-of-a-million, among our population, see?
Responsiblity & authority would still need to be tested & sorted,
but time's THE thing which changes the rules of how decisions are made,
among competent people )
---
Salut, Namaste, & Kaizen, eh?
_ /\ _