What about bottom incomes? Why have those barely increased in real terms in the last 30 years, while the top 1% of incomes has been shooting steadily up? Surely that's nothing to do with people starting companies.
For the average person, being born to a somewhat comfortable family, being able to train yourself into a good career, and being able to save and invest in a mundane way are far safer and comfortable ways to live a good, secure life. The gulf in security between someone like him now, and anyone but the very top percentiles in wealth is literally unimaginable for him, because he doesn't live the reality of an average person. His constant push in this direction is not much more than "let them eat cake", or "let them found startups".
This line is particularly disgusting. Labor has not prevailed. Labor in fact has been crushed by deregulation, union busting, automation, and most importantly globalization. Real wages have been stagnant for over 40 years while the cost of living continues to increase.
Paul Graham is delusional. He thinks that we're all getting richer because 0.01% of the population has the means to start a startup.
Let them eat soylent.
He's even out of touch with that kind of labor.
Even in RSU land, most don't get "rich" (meaning enough $ to work electively) from them. Companies have increasingly been shifting regular pay to things like RSUs.
Many people at RSU granting companies are using the proceeds to pay their mortgages or for childcare.
I know PG only a little, but I think his intention was to stir the pot on this old debate.
But yes, for the lower 70% that have as much wealth as the top 10% (and it takes about $ 95K net worth to be in that top 10%) it would be difficult to make a case that 'labor has prevailed over capital'. I would enjoy hearing more about PG's argument to support this claim.
What I see is the surplus is now going mostly to the very top -- which appears to be the point PG is making!
As Amazon and Tesla employees fail to unionize, as Uber buys a law to avoid treating their drivers as employees, as the Democrats fail to increase the minimum wage despite holding all three branches of government, as the US is the only western nation without universal health care... What honest person can look at the current state of America and think labor is winning?
The children of upper middle class parents getting rich by starting startups is not labor prevailing over capital. It's just capital. It's just the rich getting richer.
Workers in newly industrializing countries have seen huge gains in incomes. That's "labor" as well, and those gains should be counted when asking whether "labor" has done well.
If I were to read an article " How seaweed is making the entire human race more productive"; one trying to reason why you should consume seaweed if you want to be more productive, penned by someone who actively owns portions of companies involved in growing, packaging, promoting and distributing seaweed, it would feel suspicious and distasteful.
This is in the same league.
You put it as it was a bad thing per se. Moreover, what’s your suggestion?
Because the main source of productivity growth in that period was technical change, and those who were not well positioned to adapt were stuck at the bottom of the income ladder. Of course there were other factors (globalization, increasing costs in some sectors putting pressure on real incomes etc.), but that's the main story. It's quite consistent with Graham's argument.