Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (429265)	10/22/2008 4:48:54 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1570833

That's too bad because its an important metric. Its of modest importance. If I have a Ford Taurus while my neighbor has a Vette, and then the Vette owner leaves and is replaced by a person with a Ferrari and a Lamborgini, I'm not any worse off even if I'm "less equal". And if instead of people moving around its my neighbor expands his business and generates so much more profit that he could easily afford expensive exotic cars (whether or not he actually buys them) then overall things are better not worse. But by your measure things have gotten worse since we are now less equal. You are ignoring the fact that the wealth is too concentrated among a small percentage of the population. "Too concentrated" isn't a matter of fact, its inherently a matter of subjective judgment. As for "to divert attention from the real problem and try to focus on something else" the real problem of the poor is that they are poor, not that other people are wealthy. Pulling down the rich does not make things better even just for the poor.