Re: What we’re reading #5. Apparently the “we” who are reading did not read the article linked in its entirety. The “we” in “Are we living in a time of unparalleled wealth inequality? No, says economist Daniel Waldenström, who argues the orthodoxy on the subject is all wrong.“ does not really apply to the US, where inequality has been tr…
Re: What we’re reading #5. Apparently the “we” who are reading did not read the article linked in its entirety. The “we” in “Are we living in a time of unparalleled wealth inequality? No, says economist Daniel Waldenström, who argues the orthodoxy on the subject is all wrong.“ does not really apply to the US, where inequality has been trending up for decades but has not yet reached early 20th century levels. See figure 4. We should be able to hold three ideas in our head at the same time: 1) equality of wealth is not a realistic or desirable goal in a free, democratic society, 2) equality of opportunity desirable, and 3) at some point, concentration of wealth and its influence on political power conflicts with #2. Put another way, a democracy that values and rewards merit is good. A meritocracy in which wealth, perhaps initially gained through merit, is used to redefine merit and shape how it is rewarded, can weaken a democracy, become much like an aristocracy, and enable the rise of populist autocrats.
Re: What we’re reading #5. Apparently the “we” who are reading did not read the article linked in its entirety. The “we” in “Are we living in a time of unparalleled wealth inequality? No, says economist Daniel Waldenström, who argues the orthodoxy on the subject is all wrong.“ does not really apply to the US, where inequality has been trending up for decades but has not yet reached early 20th century levels. See figure 4. We should be able to hold three ideas in our head at the same time: 1) equality of wealth is not a realistic or desirable goal in a free, democratic society, 2) equality of opportunity desirable, and 3) at some point, concentration of wealth and its influence on political power conflicts with #2. Put another way, a democracy that values and rewards merit is good. A meritocracy in which wealth, perhaps initially gained through merit, is used to redefine merit and shape how it is rewarded, can weaken a democracy, become much like an aristocracy, and enable the rise of populist autocrats.