The free market is NOT anarchy. It is not zero government. In the free market there are charities, co-ops, collectives, unions, non-union competition, ... You are free. Free to be stupid and free to be brilliant. Free to not follow the fools and free to do so if you want.
Glimmerjim wrote:As this inevitable condition evolves into a caste system
Just because you think you would be in the lowest of the low caste if you lived in a free society, but the vast majority of people are far better off in free society where no one can force people to buy or sell anything and the government defends their right to do that.
What is the tried and true remedy for inoperable disproportionate wealth distribition other than a pretense of taxation remedies?
The only place where there is inoperable disproportionate wealth distribution is where there is an inoperable disproportionate government treatment distribution. Where there is still reasonable government, the wealth distribution among the young and old is quite large because there is great value in working smart and hard. In places where working doesn't pay, the wealth distribution between the young and old does not change nearly as much. Either you are born with wealth or you are born without and there is nothing you can do to change that.
How did that work out in heavily unionized Detroit? It's easy to show where this fails. Unions often remove the incentive to work smart and had because it has no impact on your pay or future prospects. So young adults get stuck, sure making a little more when they are 20 than they would have, but making far less at 50 than they otherwise would have. If you double the pay for flipping burgers, how many more people would still be flipping burgers and living at 50 like they did when they thought they were making the big bucks as a teenager?
Then look at heavily unionize Europe. They are so dramatically poorer than we are it is ridiculous. Again, there is less spread in the wealth after working a lifetime because there is vastly less incentive to work. So everybody has to live with a hell of a lot less.
It won't completely alleviate the ludicrous distribution of, not wealth, but comfortable, respectable living conditions
to the majority of the population.
Another insanity. Who cannot live comfortably in America if they live with in their means. Could an average Americans in the 50's, 60's, 70's, live comfortably? My comfort is not impacted in any why by your wealth or lack there off. All you are arguing for is a nationwide imposition of a keeping up with the Jones imposed by law. Trying to keep up with the Jones is how individuals go broke and it will drive the entire nation broke if that is what is imposed.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.