xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?

It’s hard to really judge, though, with figures floating in space like this, timelessly.

If it could be demonstrated that any of these distributions caused the overall figure to float up significantly faster relative to the others–that the shape is necessary for some helium producer(s) to operate efficiently–that figure might be preferable despite (some greater level of) immediate inequality.

But the best research I’ve found says that the correlation between inequality and faster growth is pretty small (especially in developed countries). And of course the small correlation that does show up, doesn’t demonstrate causation. Fast growth could be causing the inequality, not vice versa.

Plus, E might promote negative externalities which might not make their impacts felt on a country’s overall prosperity for many decades.

But still. Given the terms of the query, E is the obvious answer and it’s sad that only 20-30% recognize that.

It might be easy to interpret these responses of indicating some kind of moral sense of justice in people preferences.

I think an alternate reading of the results would be that given that the respondents were choosing a distribution independent of their position on it, it might be that instead of some sense of justice that minimises inequality, they fear the possibility of being low on the distribution and so choose the one that instead minimises the chance of themselves being poor(er).

Secondly, given that feeling rich is defined by contrast to those around us (e.g. a millionaire in the company of billionaires doesn’t seem as rich as he would in the company of the homeless) and the way it seems that resentment of those richer than oneself is an issue no matter what actual income one has, there is also the issue of: if I can’t be rich then he shouldn’t be either.

These two combine to give a selfish reasoning for favouring equality rather than some altruistic feeling.