Hypothesis: A sane economic model would have a statistically normal distribution of

[GeorgeGist]

value to the participants.

Economic Model Tested: Capitalism

Materials and Methods: Using money as a measure of value, I evaluated the distribution of money among residents of the United States of America.

Results: Under the Capitalist economic model the majority of money(>90%) is possessed by less than 10% of the particpants.

Conclusion: Capitalism is not a sane economic model.



Disclaimer: I am not an economist, my PhD is in science.

[Teaser]

1. That's not an hypothesis.

It's a conjecture, or a precept. The hypothesis is:

Capitalism has a statistically normal distribution of wealth.

But I know of no scientist who has a measure for "sanity" to evaluate your conjecture.

[Oregone]

2. You never tested your hypothesis

You tested a model based on an untested hypothesis


I don't think Capitalisms fault is wealth distribution, but rather, its wealth distribution is a result of its faults. A perpetual and inheiritable power to profit, without work, from other's labor and production is a problem. I find that profit de-incentatizes workers and diverts capital from businesses that may need it for innovation and reinvestment.

[The_Casual_Observer]

3. However, is been normal to assume that distribution since Reagan.

[wuvuj]

4. Capitalism by definition...

...is an attempt to pile up more $ that the next guy? Looks like the 10% are WEINERS?

So maybe Socialism is an attempt to see a normal dist curve?

[One_Life_To_Give]

5. Why?

Dollars like Hot Dogs do not have a consistent utility between the first and the nth.

When one is starving the first Hot Dog has extremely high value. But after having 9 the value of the next dog is conciderably less. Same with money, there is a high value associated with the first dollars, but that value falls off so that only a few will be interested in chasing/expending effort to obtain ever more.

I would expect a non-linear distribution. FWIW