The article talks about what to do and what not to do about inequality. Yes, reforms would help with the problem. But would they solve it? The skilled and intellectual would still be rewarded and in some instances perform very well. A reform wouldn't particularly solve the issue of income disparity, but it would help the unfair people of the world. It would allow more people to move upwards. It would also boost growth and leave the economy more stable.
I believe that this is the right route to take in improving the economy. yes, a few people wouldn't like it, namely the rich, but the vast majority would and it is what is best for the economy to grow and stabilize. The reform, in my opinion, would do great things for this economy.
4 comments:
I agree with Eric Livingston's ideas about a reform being warranted. Clearly in the United States the wealthy tend to become wealthier while the poorer seem to stagnate. A reform is necessary, whether it be through distributing the wealth more fairly, increasing access to collegiate level education and improving impoverished areas' public education etc.
Although the rich will not appreciate this, and some may call it "socialist", we need to move forward and accept change and progress.
I agree as well, however, i think simply providing welfare programs is ridiculous because all it teaches impoverished people is that they can get free money from the government without doing anything. I think the ideas in the article about making higher-level education cheaper for low income families is more important and a better use of the "rich" peoples money.
I like Adam's thinking, but I feel it necessary to strike a middle ground. A mix of welfare as a reaction to current poverty and helping both primary and secondary education systems would be most potent. As the article suggests, the best approach is bottom-up, not top-down. Giving back to the people via redistribution of higher income ($150,000/yr and up), inheritance, and capital gains taxes on a merit-based system would be effective at rewarding those who work hard and need the income most.
The problem here is, is that a lot of people will not have an incentive to work harder, because they have received money from those who are working hard. A reform may have an effect on some unfortunate people, but it will not motivate people to work harder, it will only make people more lazy. The people who are fine with being in the lower class, will just accept the money and be happy about it. Just like welfare programs do for those who are poor. A reform should be made, but with limitations as to who gets it.
Post a Comment