/biz/ - Business & Finance

I've been thinking about moral ways to properly redistribute the Pareto distribution that doesn't marginalize anyone who has worked for their success.
Should governments ban us from shopping at the large national chains because of their concentration of sales and forced us to shop at stores with higher prices, older merchandise, and tougher return policies? Should we have to buy music from groups we do not like because their song sales are low? Should we have to use doctors that are not the ones recommended by our friends and families because too many people use those doctors and ignore the others? Should we have to watch professional sports teams that use players that otherwise would not be selected?

Our daily consumption choices create much of the wealth and income concentration.

Is the free will of the consumer truly “evil" since it results in the flow of wealth to the top of the Pareto distribution as with all natural hierarchies?
Similarly, if taxation is promoted as this cure all of behavior (you tax cigarettes and alcohol so people consume less cigarettes and alcohol) why does the attitude change when applied to working your way up the Pareto distribution?
What happens if you discourage those who are successful?
If you no longer reward success and in fact ACTIVELY DISCOURAGE the masses from moving up the Pareto distribution through taxing higher levels of income, would a net negative output of production and a reduction of opportunity be the result? Do the masses become much more than a herd if there is no higher level for them to move up to?

You don't lift yourself out of a bucket by pulling on the handles.

There exist the many – the herd. The herd is composed of two types: the last man, and the slave.

The last man is the quintessential mediocre man. Striving solely for comfort and contentment, an end which makes him lazy and contemptible, the last man is wholly devoid of any creative urge within, and blind to higher values which render creativity possible.

The slave, in contrast, is a weak and sickly human being, who suffers from himself and is filled with what Nietzsche called ressentiment – a festering hatred of life generated by feelings of impotence in the face of an external reality he feels to be overpowering and threatening.

“There is among men as in every other animal species an excess of failures, of the sick, degenerating, infirm, who suffer necessarily; the successful cases are, among men, too, always the exception” (Beyond Good and Evil)

The presence of ressentiment conjures feelings of envy within the slave towards all those who do not suffer as they do – namely, the higher human beings. This envy motivates the slave to take vengeance on the higher humans. Banding together to obtain a “communal feeling of power” – the only type of power available to the slave – and under the pretext of calls for equality, the slave attempts to bring down to a more mediocre level all those higher than him through the construction of a slave, or herd, morality.

“The morality that would un-self man is the morality of decline par excellence—the fact, “I am declining,” transposed into the imperative, “all of you ought to decline”…This only morality that has been taught so far, that of un-selfing, reveals a will to the end; fundamentally, it negates life.” (Ecce Homo)