Two problems with this argument--even if one accepts Nove's sassessment of the effect of redistribution on incomes: If income and asset distribution were less uneven, the rich would have less political power, which they use to change government policy in their favor. Their consumption shapes not only what is produced but the aspirations and sense of well-being of many of those who have less, so that they consume more than they would in a more egalitarian economy, and yet feel/are deprived. Poorer people lose out on good public transportation where many people have cars. I am convinced that public telephones will soon be gone or left unfixed as more people have cell phones, so that one will have not much choice about buying one. June Zaccone Robert Naiman writes: > I have been reading Alec Nove's "Economics of Feasible Socialism Revisited" and came >across his argument that the Left is misguided when it puts too much emphasis on the >wealth of the super-rich, on the grounds that redistributing the wealth or income of >the super-rich will not go very far.
