Nastiness Diagnosis. Anthropology. Religion. Gender. Justice. A Personal Notepad For the General Public.
貧富差距不是窮人的問題，富人早已從既有制度得利。美國房貸利率優惠方案幫富人節省更多，中產階級卻付不出貸款淪為無產階級。銀行大到不能倒閉，拿了政府的救濟金借屍還魂後卻拿去給會員分紅。 政府不處理貧富差距，將會導致更多貧窮家庭學童(已經發生的現象，請見經濟學人原文)表現欠佳，在未來市場上缺乏競爭力。 這不是一個慈善的問題：富人已經從為他們設計的各種政策條款中已經獲得了許多利益。並不是要求他們與窮人分享財產。要說服認為財產的多寡是一場公平的競爭下的產物者，就必須要指出，為什麼這個後果並不是透過一個公平的競爭與貿易。太多共犯結構，從軍火商到能源商，太多關說遊說造成的偏私富人的政策。 Excerpt: In America the share of national income going to the top 0.01% (some 16,000 families) has risen from just over 1% in 1980 to almost 5% now—an even bigger slice than the top 0.01% got in the Gilded Age. inequality has reached a stage where it can be inefficient and bad for growth. Even the sort of inequality produced by meritocracy can hurt growth. If income gaps get wide enough, they can lead to less equality of opportunity, especially in education. Social mobility in America, contrary to conventional wisdom, is lower than in most European countries. The gap in test scores between rich and poor American children is roughly 30-40% wider than it was 25 years ago. And by some measures class mobility is even stickier in China than in America. there is a reform agenda to reduce income disparities that makes sense whatever your attitude towards fairness. It is not about higher taxes and more handouts. Both in rich and emerging economies, it is about attacking cronyism and investing in the young. You could call it a “True Progressivism”.