Due to the length of my response and that it included much of what I want to say I have included it as a separate post.
You raise to my mind something that I should have done initially. Define the metrics that gauge the effectiveness of a society. I will think about other metrics and comment on them.
To me in this case the metric in question is: effort equals reward. I believe this is one of the core metrics of a society. If people believe they will be rewarded for their effort they are more inclined to put it in. Also it is right that people get what they deserve irrespective of beginning. I think the more fair a society the more this principle can be seen.
For example we can use this metric to analyse feudal aristocratic societies. There is the vast majority of people making up the peasants putting in huge amounts of effort and getting little reward. Then there is the rich middle class putting in moderate amounts of effort and getting a high reward. Then there is the ruling class putting in a small amount of effort and getting massive reward.
This unfairness shows a huge flaw in such a society. Nowadays we are better but there is still great imbalance. In our society there are the majority of people putting in a large amount of effort and getting little reward. Quality of life is better than feudal peasants but they still get a small ratio of reward compared to others, which is the true way to use this metric. There are a moderate amount of people putting in a moderate amount of effort to a large amount of effort and getting a moderate reward.
I put myself in this category. I work, but I don’t strain myself and I get paid well and over double the minimum wage. I am not only saying that computer work is less physically straining than say construction work, but also the hours are predictable and easy. And sure, some people no doubt like working out on the job as you get with construction but taken in aggregate I would say those that do it would consider it more straining than computer work. Which is not to say they are all smart enough to do my job, just that they on the whole work harder and get less.
Lastly there is the significant minority, the middle-upper class that put in a moderate amount of effort and get a huge reward. In this equation it must also be considered that say someone that rises to CEO of a company, or starts his own business and hits it big may work hard initially. But eventually they can retire and live off their riches doing nothing at all. This equation must take into account the work of a person’s life compared to their reward.
Note that risk does not equal effort. If some guy bets on the stock market and wins big, the fact that he risked a lot doesn’t mean he deserves anything. This kind of random gambling is destructive to a society and results in bunch of winners and a larger bunch of losers.
Unfair distribution results in resentment and struggle. In the case of most of the world the poor are working extremely hard and live in fear of failing to survive in the case of 3rd world countries, or in the case of first world fear of spiraling into debt.
In the
You could say, they got what they deserve. They should have worked really hard in school and got a scholarship to a good university. It is true that this is possible. But the fact is it is much more difficult for someone from a poor household in a poor neighborhood going to a crappy school. Further more it is rare that if your father is a labor and your mother a waitress that you would have the motivation and inspiration to become very successful in our society.
This is not a bad thing. We need laborers and waitresses and it is faulty to think of them as less valuable than a scientist. IBM is quite effective in this way. Management is not a promotion for a programmer or a tester or whatever. It is just a job that requires a different skill set. In this way, we all have a skills and talents and the world needs all kinds of people. The problem in this world is that a laborer or waitress makes a small amount of money despite a large amount of effort.
A particularly damaging effect of this difference in wealth is the clear and different classes we have. In our society when we meet or see someone we automatically estimate their class and income. People who are significantly below us are less interesting and essentially scary. People who are significantly above us are either seen romantically or with resentment. I am of course generalising but these are the tendencies.
Imagine a world where everyone can afford to buy the clothes that they like and are not restricted by money. We would lose this instant evaluation to some degree and everyone would be more open. I'm sure there would still be tendencies in dress, but the clothes would not be better or worse, just different.
In our current world someone can have everything they could possibly want. They can live in a mansion, eat exquisite food, drive an expensive sports car, etc. Distributing the wealth more evenly will also take away this potential. This will also serve to remove the different classes we currently have. The difference between peoples possessions would be more a matter of preference (do I want a big house, a fast car or to always eat delicacies etc) and not seen as an indictment. This ties in with the level of social integration which is another important metric of a society. I will elaborate on this later.
My plan is that people will get what they deserve. I will go into this later as I want to focus on the deficiencies of capitalism for the moment before I move onto my vision for society. But basically, those that work hard get paid well and everyone has enough money. The excessive amounts of money that is currently going to the rich will be distributed to everyone. This is not to say effort equals reward is the only metric. People still have to be effective. For example a person who studies art and works really hard painting for 2 years but if they suck at it and no one wants their art, they can’t be a painter. People still have to create value for society in their effort.
> Would this order of magnitude difference be illegal in your society?
It would not be possible as everyone gets paid by the government.
> What would be the consequences on the AFL and Australian culture if football players were prevented from being payed 10 times what I earn?
Not much I don’t think. It is still a very enjoyable job and does not involve huge effort. The elite level of sport in my society would still get paid more than normal people as they have put in a large amount of effort to hone their skills to reach this level.
Here is some more good reading.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth
