MrPopo wrote:No, it's not infinite, but it is increasing. Your point would be correct if we had a zero-sum economy, but that's not the case. The government regularly injects money into the system (which must be carefully done, or else you get rampant inflation). So a CEO making more money in year 2 vs year 1 doesn't mean that the average middle class citizen made less in that same time frame, as they would in a zero-sum economy. Everyone can grow, it's just that the CEOs are growing faster. If the prices of goods as a whole aren't growing faster than middle class salaries are then I don't hink the middle class is being damaged.
I was thinking about the overall growth when I made my last statement and I probably did oversimplify things, but I'm really not sure if the growth in the overall system is commensurate with the growth in disparity between CEO's and average workers' salaries. Do you know the answer to that? I would be curious to know.
I also wonder if this increase in economic disparity ends up damaging the value of the dollar over time. If anyone knows the answer to that, I'd be interested to know that as well.
J T wrote:
I also wonder if this increase in economic disparity ends up damaging the value of the dollar over time. If anyone knows the answer to that, I'd be interested to know that as well.
Economic disparity helps the value of the dollar. With fewer dollars in circulation, the price of goods comes down. Less money is worth more in goods and services.
Or at least that's the conventional thinking. In today's global economy the value of money is terribly unpredictable.
Maybe now Nintendo will acknowledge Metroid has a fanbase?
MrPopo wrote:No, it's not infinite, but it is increasing. Your point would be correct if we had a zero-sum economy, but that's not the case. The government regularly injects money into the system (which must be carefully done, or else you get rampant inflation). So a CEO making more money in year 2 vs year 1 doesn't mean that the average middle class citizen made less in that same time frame, as they would in a zero-sum economy. Everyone can grow, it's just that the CEOs are growing faster. If the prices of goods as a whole aren't growing faster than middle class salaries are then I don't hink the middle class is being damaged.
I was thinking about the overall growth when I made my last statement and I probably did oversimplify things, but I'm really not sure if the growth in the overall system is commensurate with the growth in disparity between CEO's and average workers' salaries. Do you know the answer to that? I would be curious to know.
I don't know the answer to that, to be honest. I just question the standard talking point that CEOs making more and more money damages the middle class. Maybe it does, but I need to see data that states as such. The fact that they make more money isn't data to support that point; as I illustrated earlier simple math states that in a system where everyone's savings/salary increases at the same rate the rich get richer faster.
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
J T wrote:
I also wonder if this increase in economic disparity ends up damaging the value of the dollar over time. If anyone knows the answer to that, I'd be interested to know that as well.
Economic disparity helps the value of the dollar. With fewer dollars in circulation, the price of goods comes down. Less money is worth more in goods and services.
Really? That seems weird to me. If what we are talking about is a middle class that stays relatively stable while the upper class grows exponentially, it seems like you have a pretty consistent amount of dollars in circulation being spent by the middle class, but you have more money in the system. More money in the system without an increase in spending should drive the value of the dollar down, right?
I don't know. Maybe you're initial explanation is right. I'm not well versed in this area, it just doesn't seem intuitive to me that greater economic disparity would mean a GREATER value of the dollar, when one of the top contributors to the dollar's value is strong consumer spending. But, as you said, the value of money is terribly unpredictable right now.
J T wrote:
I also wonder if this increase in economic disparity ends up damaging the value of the dollar over time. If anyone knows the answer to that, I'd be interested to know that as well.
Economic disparity helps the value of the dollar. With fewer dollars in circulation, the price of goods comes down. Less money is worth more in goods and services.
Really? That seems weird to me. If what we are talking about is a middle class that stays relatively stable while the upper class grows exponentially, it seems like you have a pretty consistent amount of dollars in circulation being spent by the middle class, but you have more money in the system. More money in the system without an increase in spending should drive the value of the dollar down, right?
But I think that is actually less money in the system, if we're positing that the upper class spends money at the same rate regardless of income. The income of the top people comes from the middle and lower class purchasing products and services. So that money is then removed from circulation if the upper class are just saving it in order to grow it over time. Though I wish we had someone more versed in macroeconomics to set us straight.
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
Anyone who wants to help fix this fucked up situation, please check out this website and consider helping out. I just donated $100 myself.
Lol.
Fighting lobbying with lobbying? Good luck.
Sorry man. Your attempt at discouraging me won't work. I'll keep doing the right thing and you can keep being an asshole.
You're mixing Flake up with me.
Also, that site forgets the biggest thing; corporations don't actually get to vote in the national elections. You don't need to get money from the people. All you need to do is convince everyone to stop voting for incumbants until you get some representatives who you feel are actually representing you. I guarantee things would change if most of congress started only serving for single terms because they kept getting voted out.
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
