Better inequality than socialism.
Good, because the only way you can force equality is to take away freedom.
Everyone is equally poor in many countries.
A bunch of Communist clap trap. I have been many places in the world in my 70 years and have yet to find any place out side of the USA where one can pull themselves out of abject poverty and into relative affluence.
The country’s “dramatic wealth concentration” is in Washington DC and environs.
“The United States is one of the richest countries in the world. It is also one of the most unequal.”
Our poor, thanks to welfare, also rank about 80th percentile in world incomes.
Complaining “the top of his boat is much higher than mine!” is mere covetousness when the tide has lifted yours over the sandbars which most other boats were wrecked on.
The gap may be wider, true. But let’s look at those at the bottom on our scale compared to those at the bottom in other countries. I would dare say our bottom is much better off than theirs’.
The Atlantic and Davosians talk about inequality like it’s a bad thing.
If you look at the history of great wealth, most massive fortunes crumble not long after the patriarch expires. A great many were lifted economically by the rise of that fortune, and a great many benefit from its subsequent fragmentation.
The problem with such articles is the clash of axioms:
- the wealthy, on the whole, do so by leveraging mutual benefits
- the wealthy, on the whole, do so by practically stealing from others.
Those crying “inequality!” believe those who increased are so because others decreased. While perhaps the case in some cultures (volumes could be written detailing the anecdotes), largely not so here.
What used to be important was the MOVEMENT among social classes. We could go up or down. That was what made us unique.
If we’re ranked low in inequality, then they should be happy. So, either they’re just unhappy people or the author’s not too bright. I suppose both are possible simultaneously.
Yet the dream all over the world of being here
Now just why is that?
Must be that “inequality” thing
The headline is misleading. Literally it says the US is 23rd most unequal, which would mean it is relatively equal. But they meant to say the US is 23rd most equal, therefore relatively unequal.
with inclusive-development rankings that fall below their GDP per capita rankings, a sign that their economic growth is not being shared, the report says. The U.S. had the largest gap between the two measures.””
Perhaps these experts in commiecare can share with us how we can have equality when 50 million parasites refuse to work? In today’s world 23rd may be as good as it should get. The parasites should be drained with the rest of the swamp. No able-bodied liberal gets a free ride.
I would imagine that the wealth of the top 100 people could dramatically skew the stats.
A guilt trip by the ultra liberal Atlantic Magazine.
World Economic Forum = Propaganda
> factors in data on income, health, poverty, and sustainability.
We need a survey on leisure inequality.
* In school (k-12 & college) what’s the difference in time/effort spent studying vs having fun
* In work, what’s the difference in people putting in nights/weekends to get ahead vs “going to the lake/game/movies/etc”
* what’s the difference in effort adults make to learn a new skill/field or get more education vs relaxing/drinking/partying
The rich people I know have SIGNIFICANTLY less leisure time than average. It’s possible that income/wealth inequality have something to do with personal choices on leisure. Lefties should look into that. It’s not true at an individual level but seems like there’s a correlation across society.
Inequality of retarded reasoning capacity of liberals vs. ability to resolve issues by Conservatives? Sure I can accept that.