I’m reading up on the pareto fella. The period during which he was working was the industrial boom, a very young stage of capitalism that led very quickly and directly to those kinds of unbalanced distributions. He just noted this happening. But the distribution laws are obviously things that can be consciously modified if they become known… because you can purposely redistribute and defy that rule.
Course some will argue that these ratios express the natural, deserved distribution of wealth… that talent controls this… that it is meritocratic. But then a critic raises and excellent point:
“The maximum success never coincides with the maximum talent, and vice-versa,” and that such factors are the result of chance.”
Discuss.
the distribution of success and the distribution of talent, the distribution of workload, the distribution of effort, the distribution of wealth, etc are not necessarily coincident
but they all tend toward pareto ratios
cuz as far as i know there is already an equal obligation of all to work
but you can hire 10 dudes to do a job and 2 of them are going to do 80% the work
It be like that
Are you copping an attitude, Prom???
Don’t make me call the authorities to inject you with estrogen…
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tej-HxU_OM4[/youtube]
Sounds like Anarcho-Liberal-Left-Fascist paradise?
forget biden’s speech, let me give it to you straight
there are two supreme court judges over 80
both appointed by clinton
in a supreme court that already is 5-4 rep dem
do you want a 7-2 supreme court?
specially you unaffiliated undecided swing state type of folks
just register and vote this once goddammit
if you’re center, you don’t want that kind of unbalance in the supreme court for fuck knows how long
fucking vote for biden