Rather, the conversation is about what level of economic inequality is desirable in a society, and how to limit inequality — not about how to end it entirely.
How Paul Graham gets it wrong in “Economic Inequality”
Seth Bannon

Yep — nailed it. Nearly everyone agrees that some level of inequality is desirable as an incentive and nearly everyone agrees that high levels of inequality are not a good thing. Instead of trying to get people to justify the elimination of all inequality (which nobody is really asking for) the burden of proof should be on those suggesting, implicitly or otherwise, that you can never have too much inequality.

Like what you read? Give Hal Henke a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.