I mean, do we want the economy to be stable?

Not in a 'oh the rich don't so they control the media and so we don't' sorta way. But like in a 'lets educate people on the pluses and minuses, debate a while, and then come to an informed conclusion' sorta way.

Like, deep down, does the average person actually want a stable economy? Because it seems to me that there is an even split historically between the folks that want stability and a little patch of land and weekly rhythms, and the folks that just want to drunkenly burn couches in the street every full moon, or some such thing.

Not to be glib here at all. I like, would actually like to know the answer. Sorry if this comes off the cuff seeming.

▲

pstuart an hour ago | parent [-]

I have a dumbed down version of this question as variant of the Voight-Kampff test (Bladerunner) that goes like this.

You have 2 choices for how the world is shaped, pick 1:

A. You have a modest but comfortable home, a job that pays you enough so that you have what you need and can afford occasional luxuries (e.g., an annual holiday abroad), have good health insurance, access to education and childcare, etc. Everybody else has the same thing, and because of this you live in communities where the arts flourish because nobody has to worry about becoming homeless or destitute.

B. You live in magnificent mansion, one of dozens you own around the world (accessible via one of your personal Gulfstream jets). You have more money then you could ever spend in a lifetime (even recklessly). Your homes are staffed with obedient servants who cater to your every desire. I mean anything. You own them. Your mansions are on palatial estates with secure walls and guards to keep out the rabble outside -- who fight for scraps and are desperate enough to do any kind of work to keep your factories humming and printing cash.

I wouldn't hesitate to choose A because that's a world I'd love to live in and the world of B horrifies me. I don't say this as virtue signaling, it's my innate reaction.

I think that a significant portion of the population would love to choose B. And in some ways, some already have.

▲

amelius 36 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I think most people want to earn more the harder they work, and I think that is fine.

However, power laws basically spoil it because it gives a hard worker an exponential advantage, where they can (and will) use that money against other people who made different life choices.

	▲	mswphd a few seconds ago \| parent \| next [-]
		there is the other (significant) issue, that wealth (and its many benefits) are inherited, and by all indications the exponential advantage seems to pass down through generations (at least recently).
	▲	pstuart 21 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I agree that people want to be rewarded for their effort, and should be. But putting in 12 hour days being an EMT and saving peoples lives vs 12 hour days working with Claude to boost conversion pipelines have wildly different economic rewards. I'm not suggesting a Harrison Bergeron economy but its also clear that the current system is trending towards B and the game is rigged to ensure that. We don't live in a meritocracy -- there's a fair amount of luck involved (being in the right place at the right time).

▲

newfriend 18 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

You could go do A right now at a local level. You don't though, because you don't actually want to live that way. It reeks of virtue signaling despite your protest.