So, here's the deal. All biological systems arrange themselves to use their available energy most efficiently. This allows the biological system to grow and to thrive. The most efficient organization is called a Pareto Distribution, which means in effect that 80% of the wealth will go to 20% of the population. It also means that within the 20% that the same 80/20 rule will apply, with the wealth being starkly bunched up at the top.
This Pareto Distribution arises as a corollary to the Laws of Thermodynamics and Evolution. Conservation of Energy. That's it. There is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY TO AVOID A PARETO DISTRIBUTION IN ECONOMIC RESULTS.
So, if stark RELATIVE inequality is as inevitable as the sun rising in the east and setting in the west, then what do we do? Simple. We make RELATIVE inequality as non-consequential as possible by producing so much wealth that in ABSOLUTE terms everybody will be affluent. In short, we concentrate on growth, keep the economy moving forward at a rapid and sustained pace, and make sure that the bottom 80% now have as much wealth as the top 20% in absolute terms. Under the "Law of 72", the economy will double in size withers the Rate of Growth times the Number of Years equals 72. So, if we could achieve a 6% growth rate in GDP and maintain it for 12 years, the economy would double. If we maintain it for another 12 years, the economy will have quadrupled, and the the bottom 80% then will be living like the top 20% now.
Get it?
It's so important, my fellow conservatives. WE HAVE TO GET THIS POINT. Else, we let the Left breathlessly tell us that "the top 20% have 80% of the wealth and that's unfair!!!" Guys, we need to respond "Congratulations, Leftie! You've discovered the Pareto Distribution! Now, can we please accept the inevitability of RELATIVE inequality, which will finally allow us to begin to end ABSOLUTE poverty once and for all?
In order to do that we need to start by accepting the fact that Pareto's Law is as unavoidable as the Law of Gravity. "The poor you will always have with you." That's right. The RELATIVE poor are inevitable. But through economic growth what we can do is provide the poorest person in the world with a living standard equal to an upper middle-class American today. That's possible.
But it only becomes possible when we accept the inevitability of stark RELATIVE inequality in economic outcomes. Only then will we truly be in a position to grow the economy to the point where the poorest family living in a cardboard box in Calcutta will live like the average family living in Newport Beach today.
Beautiful post. We actually did come close to achieving that in this country -- even our poor were better off than in most other countries, and the rising tide of free markets that lifted all boats by the 1980s and 90s, seeing even the urban poor far better off than the descendants of the pioneers during the Depression and the Dustbowl.