Thomas Jefferson famously said "But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."
I have no doubt that he was wise enough to include his neighbor's earnings in that sentiment.
Let us assume, arguendo, that "income inequality" is a fact.
So what?
Is there evidence that the "income inequality" farrago is simply one more Liberal tale of victimology....aimed at proving that only vaunted 'Big Government" can save us??
Is it simply one more attempt by the Democrats to latch on to greed and envy of human nature, and turn it into votes and power?
Could be?
1. The most common moral arguments for and against inequality rest on claims about its consequences... If these claims cannot be supported with evidence, skeptics will find the moral arguments unconvincing. If the claims about consequences are actually wrong, the moral arguments are also wrong.
2. ...Christopher S. Jencks..... a renowned professor of social policy at Harvard, abandoned his 10-year-old project of writing a book about the consequences of inequality on the nations health and opportunity, on its politics and crime.
Why? ... [because] specific evidence about inequalitys effects has been hard to find.
3. .... Nobel laureate Joseph E. Stiglitz argues that we are paying a high price for the inequality that is increasingly scarring our economy... rising inequality is putting a brake on growth and promoting economic instability."
a. .... President Obamas chief economic adviser, Alan B. Krueger, ... showed that in countries with wider income gaps the children of poor parents were more likely to grow up to be poor adults.
b. ... British epidemiologists Kate E. Pickett and Richard G. Wilkinson .... say that severe inequality undermines social bonds and dashes the health of millions. It contributes to mental illness. It increases obesity and teenage pregnancy. It fosters crime. It lowers life expectancy. These ills dont affect just the poor. They affect everybody.
4. But does the data really back this up? One problem with these analyses is that they are based on correlations between levels of inequality and variables like life expectancy or the odds of poor children climbing the income ladder. But such correlations cant prove inequality causes other social ills. They cant disentangle inequality from the myriad things pushing American society this way and that.
5. People that worry about inequality for normative reasons have been very quick to jump on plausible hypothesis and a little bit of evidence to make sweeping conclusions about its consequences,..."
a. To avoid misleading correlations and better isolate inequalitys impact, Mr. Kenworthy studied its evolution over time, comparing how changes in income concentration across the worlds industrialized nations related to changes in a whole set of social and economic outcomes, from growth and employment to health and educational attainment.
b. My tests suggest it seems to be a small player in the overall story.... no meaningful impact of inequality on growth one way or the other.... found no significant relationship between increasing inequality and life expectancy, infant mortality or college graduation rates,..."
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/26/business/economy/making-sense-of-income-inequality.html?_r=0
And interesting, informative analysis found....surprisingly, in the New York Time!
One finds oneself thinking....how is it that the official organ of Progressive thought is puncturing a prevalent Leftist talking point....
...well, there is more in the article.
Stay tuned....I'll provide it......'I'll report, you decide.'
I have no doubt that he was wise enough to include his neighbor's earnings in that sentiment.
Let us assume, arguendo, that "income inequality" is a fact.
So what?
Is there evidence that the "income inequality" farrago is simply one more Liberal tale of victimology....aimed at proving that only vaunted 'Big Government" can save us??
Is it simply one more attempt by the Democrats to latch on to greed and envy of human nature, and turn it into votes and power?
Could be?
1. The most common moral arguments for and against inequality rest on claims about its consequences... If these claims cannot be supported with evidence, skeptics will find the moral arguments unconvincing. If the claims about consequences are actually wrong, the moral arguments are also wrong.
2. ...Christopher S. Jencks..... a renowned professor of social policy at Harvard, abandoned his 10-year-old project of writing a book about the consequences of inequality on the nations health and opportunity, on its politics and crime.
Why? ... [because] specific evidence about inequalitys effects has been hard to find.
3. .... Nobel laureate Joseph E. Stiglitz argues that we are paying a high price for the inequality that is increasingly scarring our economy... rising inequality is putting a brake on growth and promoting economic instability."
a. .... President Obamas chief economic adviser, Alan B. Krueger, ... showed that in countries with wider income gaps the children of poor parents were more likely to grow up to be poor adults.
b. ... British epidemiologists Kate E. Pickett and Richard G. Wilkinson .... say that severe inequality undermines social bonds and dashes the health of millions. It contributes to mental illness. It increases obesity and teenage pregnancy. It fosters crime. It lowers life expectancy. These ills dont affect just the poor. They affect everybody.
4. But does the data really back this up? One problem with these analyses is that they are based on correlations between levels of inequality and variables like life expectancy or the odds of poor children climbing the income ladder. But such correlations cant prove inequality causes other social ills. They cant disentangle inequality from the myriad things pushing American society this way and that.
5. People that worry about inequality for normative reasons have been very quick to jump on plausible hypothesis and a little bit of evidence to make sweeping conclusions about its consequences,..."
a. To avoid misleading correlations and better isolate inequalitys impact, Mr. Kenworthy studied its evolution over time, comparing how changes in income concentration across the worlds industrialized nations related to changes in a whole set of social and economic outcomes, from growth and employment to health and educational attainment.
b. My tests suggest it seems to be a small player in the overall story.... no meaningful impact of inequality on growth one way or the other.... found no significant relationship between increasing inequality and life expectancy, infant mortality or college graduation rates,..."
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/26/business/economy/making-sense-of-income-inequality.html?_r=0
And interesting, informative analysis found....surprisingly, in the New York Time!
One finds oneself thinking....how is it that the official organ of Progressive thought is puncturing a prevalent Leftist talking point....
...well, there is more in the article.
Stay tuned....I'll provide it......'I'll report, you decide.'
