By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Leadified said:
Aeolus451 said:

He definitely is. I love his explanations and that he's outspoken in spite of social pressure. He knocked that one interview/debate with that feminist anchor out of the park.

Peterson's argument is bizarre, and he just sort of misses the point. The main problem with inequality is wealth is increasingly concentrated into a smaller group of people (0.01-0.5%), while this is also happening, productivity is increasing but wages are remaining stagnant

Have you heard of the Pareto Principle? Peterson explains it better than I could, but essentially in all areas of human productivity the square root of the total number of people produce approximately 50% of whatever it is they are producing. It's true in all areas of human productivity. This is why I doubt your claim that a smaller group of people are getting more of the wealth. The percentage will most likely remain the same.

Also, remember that the 'top 1%' or whatever figure you want to throw out there is an ever changing group of people. There is serious income mobility in the USA. It's only in dictatorships (which are mostly Communist or Socialist at the moment) where the people at the very top are disgustingly wealthy and the people at the bottom are starving.