What's driving income inequality?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 июн 2024
- review.chicagobooth.edu | Income inequality is on the rise in many countries, but is it due to earned wealth, or inherited wealth-and should policy makers be trying to stop it? Chicago Booth's Eric Zwick and Luigi Zingales, along with Gabriel Zucman of the University of California, Berkeley, join Hal Weitzman to discuss the forces driving the phenomenon, as well as the political and economic ramifications greater inequality could have.
lock these guys in a room with other such brilliant people and implement their agreed policy - like a Supreme Court of Taxation and Economic Policy. Stop leaving it to special interest politicians.
I really got the impression that Eric Zwick knew was he was talking about and had integrity in his arguments. He never gave anecdotal evidence and held the other experts to their claims. However, it also seemed to me that Luigi Zingales played the role of someone essentially saying 'we can't know anything about the future', many of his statements were either discouraging or inconclusive towards progressive reform of equality of opportunity and frankly equality in general.
Only Dr. Zucman makes sense to me. Big corps have unfair tax benefits that small biz can't enjoy. That's not free market; that's govt subsidized monopoly.
Democracy doesn't mean equality in income or wealth. Redistribution of wealth is a subject independent of social justice; social justice's a collective decision of people's vision of themselves. RoW is one of the means like abolition.
When Aristotle got the internet. (or why income inequality is not the issue)
Aristotle got the internet the other day, as well as the whole ancient world. The classical Greeks immediately took advantage of this science fiction chicanery, and in what would seem like a fortnite used this portal to use all the knowledge of the world to take command of the world, economically that is. After all, why take over the Celts when even when armed with universal knowledge they have not the wits to make even a decent Celt phone? Better to make and sell them scads of them instead. And so Aristotle, Plato, and the lot of the academy and the hyper-competitive Greek city states bootstrapped themselves to lord over the world, while the barbarians merely squabbled, mired in poverty and tribal misgovernment. The Greeks became the new one percenters, owning just about everything, and they did so not because they had exclusive ownership of knowledge, which they did not, but because their society was hyper-incentivized to use and expand that knowledge.
Nowadays, with the internet knowledge is universal and free, and one can learn to fish, build a home, treat a cold, program a computer, or build a nuclear reactor. It’s all there, waiting only for incentive. The maddening thing about the current complaints about unequal distribution of wealth is that it is a description of the symptom, not the disease. Rather it is the unequal distribution of incentive as mediated by societal, cultural, and governmental norms that is holding us back. Just ask the ancient Greeks, who in their relative poverty, were the true one percenters in the ancient world, attained not just by their possession of knowledge but by the incentive to acquire it, use it, and in their peerless gift to humanity, explain the world.
Or listen to the great economist Milton Friedman for the same perspective
ruclips.net/video/MRpEV2tmYz4/видео.html
www.doctormezmer.com/blog
Income inequality is a bi product of globalization and internationalsim. All developed countries in this world became this way from industrialization and nationalism. The companies producing things were actually trying to build quality goods so they put time and money into their workers. As a result people made good money and had good lives. Now the same product is made from parts from several countries by people that make nothing. Now the people that used to make decent money keep making less to compete their foreign counter part. The rich will always be rich. They have the money and the lawyers to stay on top. They shouldn't be punished for it though. The socialist mind set cracks me up the most. One of the biggest reasons you don't see people starting businesses or having them last to long is cause of the taxes and regualtions. That will create more inequality than a rich person anyday.
The actual problem is not inequality but that a good portion of the income distributed to those at the top is unearned, is derived because of the systems of law and taxation that favors rent-seeking over the production of goods and services. There is, in effect, a redistribution of wealth from producers to non-producing rentier interests. Caring societies have since the second half of the 20th century implemented social programs designed to mitigate the worst consequences of the underlying systemic problems but have not come close to removing rentier privilege.
A few economists have endeavored to challenge the status quo and challenge the ideological bias expressed by those on the Right and on the Left. Two who stand out are Joseph Stiglitz and Michael Hudson. However, the one economist who has for more than a half century written consistently on these issues is Mason Gaffney (emeritus professor of economics, University of California). A volume in honor of Mason Gaffney was published recently with the title "Rent Unmasked." This title essentially says all that is necessary to say. If we want a justice distribution of income and wealth the solution is to change the way government at all levels raises revenue, moving away from the taxation of wages, salaries, commerce and tangible goods, and begin to collect the rent of land and land-like assets.
Corporate Capitalism and Greed are driving income inequality.
You're gonna have to re tally my retirement,that shit is wrong,i can't make ends meet off what i'm getting per month.
Furthermore,I need another stimulus on steroids! Okay!
1st lie I encountered: everyone must file a tax return. WRONG!
In the U.S. , the only citizens who are required to file an income tax return, are anyone making profits or gains, not labor or wages.
Greed
Gabriel Zucman is a nice guy and must be doing an important work. But I'm afraid his solution is too fixated on more taxation. Sorry, you need to think out of the box if you wanna fix inequality. Somehow I feel like, out of the three, Luigi Zingales is the one with an overall understanding of the issue of inequality - yet, he's not bold enough with his proposed solutions.
I agree. Taxation, esp. with relation to capital expenditure are part of the mix, but it seems that the implicit solution or non-solution being forwarded for "acceptable or fair inequality levels" is the universal basic income, which is counter-productive without the valuing of social labour and the segregation of firms in naturally oligopolistic sectors to local markets along with the facilitation of participation in regional and global trade among small-business through clustering. Zingales talks about reducing anti-competitive behaviour as a key element of distribution, but even a competitive market dominated by large multinationals (more competition in the mobile space, for example) does not satisfy the need to redistribute income. Without limitations on large firms' range of action, the issue of race-to-the-bottom tax incentives for large firms like Amazon and Foxconn to locate in specific localities will continue, to the detriment of social services and the environment. Another key aspect of addressing this policy dilemma is migration and border management, which is right now too focused on immigration as border crossing rather than focusing on risk reduction for rural communities and the regulation of labour market access, the absence of which drastically impacts the flexibility of wages for low-income earners. The global economy needs a mix of food and raw material price inflation and balancing income losses to the elite through the reduction of energy sustainability and the social gains of trade access redistribution. Finally, there must be constitutional trade-offs for those in positions of social influence. Socially-influential professions such as journalists, armed forces, lawyers, doctors, university professors and large-firm executives or related consultants already exert significant political power and should not be able to run to become members of the executive. This practice tends to concentrate the circles of influence, allowing ambitious people to transfer their professional networks and public notoriety into unbalanced political influence across estates and branches of government.
The problem with unfettered liberal democratic capitalism with tax law that favors the rich.
I really got the impression that Eric Zwick knew was he was talking about and had integrity in his arguments. He never gave anecdotal evidence and held the other experts to their claims. However, it also seemed to me that Luigi Zingales played the role of someone essentially saying 'we can't know anything about the future', many of his statements were either discouraging or inconclusive towards progressive reform of equality of opportunity and frankly equality in general.
Corporate Capitalism and Greed are driving income inequality.