That is the article I will be referring too.
"The same is true of effort, as measured by hours worked. Some people work more hours than average and some work less, but nobody works a billion times more hours than anybody else."
Not counting how the rich don't end up doing any work for humanity in the long run so this statement could easily be true of every worker, ofc.
This also should be obvious.
"What factors, then, determine how individuals become wealthy? Could it be that chance plays a bigger role than anybody expected? "
If I were a bettin girl, I would say that a ton of people were completely correct in how much chance is involved, and I'll give you a hint. It wasn't the right wing.
"The results are something of an eye-opener."
I hope so, the more people who actually understand how capitalism works the better.
"Their simulations accurately reproduce the wealth distribution in the real world. But the wealthiest individuals are not the most talented (although they must have a certain level of talent). They are the luckiest."
Wow such a big shocker here.
"The computer model charts each individual through a working life of 40 years. During this time, the individuals experience lucky events that they can exploit to increase their wealth if they are talented enough."
Capital accumulation, once you are above the threshold to extract more money from those around you then you need to survive the profit will accumulate infinitely. That's not hard to understand lmao
"That may not be surprising or unfair if the wealthiest 20 percent turn out to be the most talented. But that isn’t what happens. The wealthiest individuals are typically not the most talented or anywhere near it. “The maximum success never coincides with the maximum talent, and vice-versa,” say the researchers."
It's almost like markets don't work.
"The team shows this by ranking individuals according to the number of lucky and unlucky events they experience throughout their 40-year careers. “It is evident that the most successful individuals are also the luckiest ones,” they say. “And the less successful individuals are also the unluckiest ones.”"
Wow look at that, people don't choose to be in poverty? I thought people loved starving to death!
"The team studied three models, in which research funding is distributed equally to all scientists; distributed randomly to a subset of scientists; or given preferentially to those who have been most successful in the past. Which of these is the best strategy?
The strategy that delivers the best returns, it turns out, is to divide the funding equally among all researchers. And the second- and third-best strategies involve distributing it at random to 10 or 20 percent of scientists."
Wow its almost like our entire method of the distribution of resources is inefficient in every possible area, who would have guessed.
With a planned economy we could change it based on research, to bad in this market economy it probably won't change for a very long time, if ever.
"A similar approach could also be applied to investment in other kinds of enterprises, such as small or large businesses, tech startups, education that increases talent, or even the creation of random lucky events."
What would be better is to get rid of the capital accumulation all together, to completely eliminate this problem on all levels instead of make a half-assed attempt to fix it that will have no real impact.