I recall seeing somewhere a fairly thorough refutation of Pareto distribution theory. Now I can’t find it anywhere. Anyone know of a good one?
Note that this is not about Pareto optimality but the idea that wealth always follows an inversely proportional distribution along the lines of 80%-20%.
Let’s say wealth follows a Pareto distribution. So what? That doesn’t mean the government should redistribute everything. The government itself would be subject to the same distribution: 20% would control 80% of the government, 20% of the 20% (4%) would control 80% of the 80% (64%), etc. Example: Soviet Union.
Well, obviously. But I am looking for empirical evidence that contradicts Pareto.
Good luck. You can refute 80-20, but that doesn’t necessarily refute 90-10, 70-30, or even 50-50, which are all possible under Pareto.
I thought Pareto was ‘strictly’ 80-20.