Economist View on inequality and soak the rich populism:
Alberto Alesina and Paola Giuliano ask, "Will Americans turn into 'inequality intolerant' Europeans?" They use the word intolerant because they believe that "The increase in income inequality of the last three decades in the US is not extraordinary if viewed from a very long-term perspective," therefore the recent increase in inequality and social immobility shouldn't be viewed as unfair. But I don't see why the distribution or degree of immobility in the past was necessarily fair just because it prevailed, nor why the recent increase in inequality - which we know was based in large part upon false valuations and hence false rewards - should be viewed as justifiable in any case
I found this comment useful to ponder...
As long a American social safety nets are rising citizens will accept increased income inequality. American's do not care how the safety nets are financed just as long as the nets are rising at a steady rate. As the leading edge of the "baby boomers" turn 62 this year and opt in for early Social Security retirement, secondary to higher unemployment, the focus will zero in on Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA). Last year (2008) COLA hit 5.8%, a big draw for newly qualified Social Security beneficiaries. This year COLA will be miniscule and the rapidly growing retired community will not be happy.
But social safety nets didn't rise during the 90's when inequality sky-rocketed? I think that as wages have fallen stagnant you get more frustrations. Even the tea party protests were full of the "I'm struggling to make ends meet" anger. Republicans have just done a good job to redirect it towards "Government" and "Politicians"--as if these weren't doing the will of (if not "the people")those who got them elected.
No comments:
Post a Comment