tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3267597063062817567.post2958621286112384817..comments2023-12-24T00:14:00.742-06:00Comments on Cup O' Joel: Today in inequality reading: What's your CEO making?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3267597063062817567.post-47206230005711503562011-04-21T19:18:01.219-05:002011-04-21T19:18:01.219-05:00Actually, they were middle class white women who f...Actually, they were middle class white women who financed their company with credit cards. Easy credit, determination, skill, and a market niche are what helped them to succeed.<br /><br /><i>Income mobility is indeed possible between the middle quintiles even under a system that discourages entry-level entrepreneurship</i><br />Based on the <a href="http://www.economicmobility.org/assets/pdfs/Upward_Fig_1.pdf" rel="nofollow">Pew reports</a> I'v mentioned elsewhere intergenerational income mobility is nearly perfect (i.e. close to 20%) for the middle quintiles, so to the extent that our system discourages entry-level entrepreneurship, you're right.KhabaLoxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13853922074936343470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3267597063062817567.post-51363486077009642652011-04-20T19:15:59.574-05:002011-04-20T19:15:59.574-05:00K, I stand corrected. If we encourage high-skilled...K, I stand corrected. If we encourage high-skilled immigration and crack down on low-skilled, illegal immigration, we'd be reducing the share of low-income imports. Got me there.<br /><br />Income mobility is indeed possible between the middle quintiles even under a system that discourages entry-level entrepreneurship (the work that Walter Williams did 30 years or so ago on the ways our regs against entrepreneurship have hurt low-skilled blacks). <br /><br />I'm guessing the founders of your company were immigrants. The tragedy of Americnan policy is that it's much easier for a recent immigrant who can't speak the language to be an economic success than it is for a second- (or even fourth-) generation black kid in a ghetto ... largely as a result of welfare programs that were meant to help those kids.Rick Hendersonhttp://deregulator.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3267597063062817567.post-76503485077582040892011-04-20T12:38:49.494-05:002011-04-20T12:38:49.494-05:00"a regulatory state that discourages if not o..."a regulatory state that discourages if not outlaws entry-level entrepreneurship, "<br /><br />Rick, in other places you've said that our society has high income mobility. If not for the ability of entrepreneurs to start from nothing and succeed (like the owners of my company), how do you explain the (alleged ;) high income mobility?<br /><br />If income mobility comes in large part from entry level entrepreneurship and education, but we don't have that, how do we have the income mobility?<br /><br />"It's also the case that our current immigration system worsens income inequality in that it is much easier for uneducated and unskilled people to reside in America than it is for highly educated professionals.<br />...<br /> I'd like to see a much more generous legal immigration policy targeting skilled individuals and stronger restrictions against illegal immigrants. But that would exacerbate income inequality."<br /><br />These statements seem contradictory to me.KhabaLoxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13853922074936343470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3267597063062817567.post-82095661728883424112011-04-20T02:29:03.210-05:002011-04-20T02:29:03.210-05:00And the surprises never cease: Can it be that I ac...And the surprises never cease: Can it be that I actually find myself agreeing with a couple of Rick's points? Granted, they're the ones closest to the traditional left, but still -- that's kind of nice to have some common ground there.Notorious Ph.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08700875559325201086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3267597063062817567.post-90367795235356731122011-04-20T02:26:24.778-05:002011-04-20T02:26:24.778-05:00According to what I can access, my CEO's pay f...According to what I can access, my CEO's pay for 2010 was actually <i>down</i> 2.5% from 2009. Mine went down about 2%. I'll admit that these figures did surprise me.<br /><br />On the other hand, his 2.5% pay decrease is equal to one-fourth my annual salary in total. And he also gets a house and an airplane.Notorious Ph.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08700875559325201086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3267597063062817567.post-83437056041715493402011-04-19T19:25:30.739-05:002011-04-19T19:25:30.739-05:00I fully agree. The current system does not reward ...I fully agree. The current system does not reward people at the bottom. The causes of that are legendary: inadequate public education, a regulatory state that discourages if not outlaws entry-level entrepreneurship, a regressive tax structure. <br /><br />It's also the case that our current immigration system worsens income inequality in that it is much easier for uneducated and unskilled people to reside in America than it is for highly educated professionals. (The system also tends to depress wages for low-skilled citizens.) I'd like to see a much more generous legal immigration policy targeting skilled individuals and stronger restrictions against illegal immigrants. But that would exacerbate income inequality. And, in this case, I'd support it.Rick Hendersonhttp://deregulator.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3267597063062817567.post-58811078190886543342011-04-19T15:33:16.658-05:002011-04-19T15:33:16.658-05:00Rick: I don't know that free-marketeers really...Rick: I don't know that free-marketeers really consider inequality a problem at all. I've seen Ross and Reihan address the issue, but they seem ... out of the mainstream of conservatism when they do so. <br /><br />I'm fine with working on helping folks on the bottom do better and continually improve. I have no need to penalize people at the top. But it appears from my vantage point that the system is set up to reward the folks at the top and disregard folks at the bottom. And most attempts to address the matter are shouted down with cries of "socialism."Joelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14753052418658482508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3267597063062817567.post-33251180523993173312011-04-19T15:24:25.599-05:002011-04-19T15:24:25.599-05:00Joel, you're issuing a challenge that free-mar...Joel, you're issuing a challenge that free-marketeers may never address because we disagree on the essential problem. This may be a bit of a caricature, but when the left looks at income inequality, their pat remedy seems to be: How can we penalize those at the top and redistribute that wealth to those on the bottom? <br /><br />When I see chronic poverty, I ask, how can we develop policies that help those who can be self-sufficient do better and continually improve? <br /><br />I'm not so concerned with those at the top because penalizing them provides only temporary relief for those at the bottom (Thatcher's "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money" or "Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day; teach him to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime"). <br /><br />You cannot continue to take from the top and give to the bottom forever <b>if that's the extent of your policy agenda</b>.<br /><br />Or for a lighter take on this, consider the Dennis Moore sketch from Monty Python's Flying Circus.Rick Hendersonhttp://deregulator.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.com