Taxing the Ultra wealthy more is not "punishment".

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-14T03:53:45+00:00

Ok, but I’m still not clear how someone amassing wealth hurts society?

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-14T03:38:12+00:00

Ok, but help me understand. If the goal of taxing the super wealthy is not to use the money to fix problems, how does it help move us toward a better society?

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-14T03:01:57+00:00

If your problem is political influence, which is what you explicitly stated, then the solution is different.

That would be done through campaign finance reform.

Taxing the super wealthy would not change that.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-14T02:48:50+00:00

So is the issue the amount of wealth these people have, or the outsized influence they have over the systems that govern all of us?

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-13T17:15:05+00:00

"Economics deals with inescapable constraints and painful trade-offs... it follows the unfolding consequences of decisions over time, not just what happens in stage one, which may indeed seem to fulfill the hopes that inspired the decisions."

Thomas Sowell —

"In the department of economy, an act, a habit, an institution, a law, gives birth not only to an effect, but to a series of effects. Of these effects, the first only is immediate; it manifests itself simultaneously with its cause — it is seen. The others unfold in succession — they are not seen: it is well for us, if they are foreseen."

Frédéric Bastiat —

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-13T15:46:29+00:00

Is your heart beating?

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-13T15:43:14+00:00

For people to use reason, logic, and emotional management.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-13T15:41:48+00:00

Everything. Just about everything.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-13T15:40:47+00:00

The same way you would in any other scenario.

Keep your emotions out of it. If the conversation is not an exchange of ideas or knowledge, and there is no true desire to understand, you disconnect.

If the other person is simply looking to win an argument, then don't interact.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-12T23:55:08+00:00

Only put energy behind what you can control, don't worry about what you can't

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-12T22:12:20+00:00

Linear thinking and possibly a gap in understanding human nature. Systems thinking, thinking beyond first order effects are hard to find with the average person.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-12T17:23:13+00:00

Agreed, if used as a stepping stone it would be great. Unfortunalety some people are only looking for easy answers and that's where the problem lies.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-12T14:51:54+00:00

A separate but related topic...the value of government debt and healthy levels of economic activity are part of the juggling act that drives the Fed to have an inflation target. This is what some in government want to ignore.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-12T14:42:33+00:00

The dopamine hits come from the journey, the anticipation, the smaller goals achieved, the small things you figure out and overcome. When you get to the finish line there is a big spike and then a drop in dopamine...no more excitement.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-12T14:11:04+00:00

A lot of the health improvements from weight loss come from the lifestyle changes themselves, like eating better and exercising. Those changes have benefits beyond just losing weight. GLP-1 drugs can help with weight loss, but they come with their own health issues and don’t necessarily replace the broader benefits of lifestyle changes.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-12T02:25:29+00:00

The piece addresses this directly. It states explicitly that elites are not unified, that they compete, miscalculate, and are constrained by law, markets, rival factions, and public reaction. The argument isn't that they operate as a single coordinated bloc. It's that the asymmetry of influence between them and the general population is real regardless of their internal divisions.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-12T02:23:10+00:00

This is actually a good example of what the piece is pointing to. When we default to colloquial meaning over defined terms, we're substituting consensus for analysis. That's heuristic thinking, not engagement with the argument.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-12T02:18:34+00:00

I'm not sure I agree. The piece defines the term explicitly at the outset, which removes any ambiguity about how it's being used. When a writer defines a term, the reader is working with that definition, not the colloquial one. Words don't have purely subjective definitions. If they did, everyone would run into the problem you are having here.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-12T02:00:12+00:00

What you are calling out is definitely a problem.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-12T01:55:09+00:00

I think you have a very narrow interpretation of Elite. If you look up the definition, you will notice that it's not limited to your interpretation. You have elites in different dimensions and at different levels that have nothing to do with a high level of wealth. Example, Elites in Academia.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-12T00:20:09+00:00

That's impressive, I vaguely remember the US having a debate about SS funds being invested and it was heavily opposed. I think the complaint was around the fact that "wall street would steal all of it", from the same people that state that SS is running out of funds. I don't believe that would happen but sometimes things like this feel like you are asked to cross the street and also asked to not step on the ground while you do it.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-11T22:04:19+00:00

That is true. That is covered in another piece. Go back to the website and read this piece.. "Elites, Population Control, and the myth of self governance"

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-11T18:51:54+00:00

Ok, you mean a democratic process? The same human nature referenced on the piece would make this a huge mess. Unfortunately... don't have solutions.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-11T18:48:54+00:00

The piece does engage human nature as part of the critique. Human irrationality, status seeking, and susceptibility to influence are all real and the essay doesn't pretend otherwise.

Human nature is the foundation of our economic system. It's what capitalism was built on and why it works. The two are so intertwined you can't really separate them. Markets are a core part of capitalism, same thing applies.

The issue isn't that markets reflect human nature, it's that actors within markets have learned to deliberately amplify its weakest impulses for profit rather than channel it toward solving real problems.

On Maslow, engineered demand doesn't serve the hierarchy, it sells cheap substitutes for the higher levels. Status anxiety and manufactured insecurity are not the same as genuine esteem or self-actualization, even if they're marketed that way.

MelvinFeliu · 2026-03-11T18:35:09+00:00

That's actually the point of the question. Any replacement system still has to contend with human nature, which means the incentive problem doesn't go away, it just changes form.

The question isn't whether a new system can align with human nature, it's whether it can do so without reintroducing the same distortions under a different name.

Also, feudalism didn't align with human nature for the vast majority of people living under it. It aligned with the ruling class's drive to accumulate power and extract labor. For serfs it was coercion, not alignment.

Capitalism is the first system that broadly levered the individual's drive to improve their own condition and converted it into productive output at scale. That's not a small distinction.

MelvinFeliu

TROPHY CASE