Here is the basic idea:
For years, we've debated rising economic inequality. On one side, liberals denounce it as unjust. Redistribute wealth to the poor and middle class, they say. On the other, conservatives minimize its importance. What matters most is overall economic growth, they retort. Well, the conjunction of the presidential campaign and the financial crisis is giving the debate a curious twist. Liberals have triumphed politically; soaking the rich has become more acceptable. But conservatives may have won the intellectual argument; making the rich poorer doesn't make everyone else richer.My sophisticated, nuanced commentary: WELL, DUH. Remember too the issue of incentives.
There is also this quotation: "By and large, the poor aren't poor because the rich are rich. They're usually poor for their own reasons: family breakdown, low skills, destructive personal habits and plain bad luck."
I add too that everyone, for the most part, wants to be rich. But not all are willing to work hard to make it happen. And some are too willing to take the assets of those who did and do.
No comments:
Post a Comment