> Would you rather have richer (in real terms) society (including richer lowest decile) with larger wealth inequality or poorer society with smaller inequalities?
My point is that those are not the only options. You don't make some more people richer such that there's more inequality. That doesn't make sense. You raise everyone up simultaneously by distributing in a rational measured way. I think maybe you're saying "bigger middle class"? If so, then no, I'd rather say, "no classes, what's the point. We know how to distribute and logistically solve these problems."
> Would you rather have richer (in real terms) society (including richer lowest decile) with larger wealth inequality or poorer society with smaller inequalities?
My point is that those are not the only options. You don't make some more people richer such that there's more inequality. That doesn't make sense. You raise everyone up simultaneously by distributing in a rational measured way. I think maybe you're saying "bigger middle class"? If so, then no, I'd rather say, "no classes, what's the point. We know how to distribute and logistically solve these problems."