People Wouldn't Rather Have Higher Relative Income in a Poorer Society(www.richardhanania.com)
6 pointsby paulpauper7 hours ago5 comments
  • galaxyLogic6 hours ago
    “life is mostly status competition.” is anectodal. But even if it was true, it doesn't mean people would want to move to a poor country, if that gave them a higher societal status.

    For one thing consider life-expectancy. Consider moving to Pluto. In there my life-expectancy might be 5 days whereas for others there it might be only 1 day. My relative "wealth" there would be 5x the average. But for sure I wouldn't want to move there just because I would be better off than others.

    And status, is not only about money, because status is determined not by you but by others.

  • bell-cot6 hours ago
    However true the "prices are the same" claim might be at t=0, I'd assume the 99.99% who earn $25K (when I'm earning $50K) will make sure that $25K remains a livable income, long-term.

    Vs. the 99.99% earning $200K (when I'm earning $100K) will have no incentive to keep my own, theoretically higher, income livable.

  • pmdulaney6 hours ago
    If you're of the mind that "a rising tide lifts all boats," then you find Hanania's conclusion gratifying; otherwise you don't.
  • phendrenad26 hours ago
    Better headline: People responded to a survey a certain way, which is highly open to interpretation based on how we think the responders reasoned about the question, and this author is concluding that we can their responses at face value, with no justification for that approach, as is the controversy-stirring manner of a frequent X controversy-stirrer.
  • 1970-01-016 hours ago
    Which is why civil excommunication for billionaires is a serious threat they constantly downplay. If you don't want to pay more taxes, go run your business from Hati and tell us how well it works out. One year in hell will change that business plan giving you insane bonuses for unlocking even more shareholder value.
    • skybrian6 hours ago
      Haiti is a weird choice. There are much nicer places.

      Also, moving to a different state in the US is a lot easier.

      • wondering5du6 hours ago
        In that kind of hypothetical excommunication it would be likely that you can flee only to US hostile countries. And if you are banned by the whole US money system you are in practice pennyless. Billionaires are that rich only because people allow them to be, that is the bottom line here. Laws that prevent excess wealth for single individuals can be written, no need to relocate them to Haiti.
      • 1970-01-016 hours ago
        It should be a federal law, no sheltering behind any states.
        • pmdulaney6 hours ago
          I certainly think that homelessness should be dealt with on the federal level. Why should California bear the brunt of the homeless problem, just because it has a nice climate?