Dan Tuffs for the Guardian The tour comes at a critical moment for America and the world. It began on the day that Republicans in the US Senate voted for sweeping tax cuts that will deliver a bonanza for the super wealthy while in time raising taxes on many lower-income families. The changes will exacerbate wealth inequality that is already the most extreme in any industrialized nation, with three men — Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and Warren Buffet — owning as much as half of the entire American people.
January Since the s, economic inequality in the US has increased dramatically.
And in particular, the rich have gotten a lot richer. Nearly everyone who writes about economic inequality says that it should be decreased. I'm interested in this question because I was one of the founders of a company called Y Combinator that helps people start startups.
Almost by definition, if a startup succeeds, its founders become rich.
Which means by helping startup founders I've been helping to increase economic inequality. If economic inequality should be decreased, I shouldn't be helping founders. No one should be. But that doesn't sound right. So have we just shown, by reductio ad absurdum, that it's false that economic inequality should be decreased?
That doesn't sound right either. Surely it's bad that some people are born practically locked into poverty, while at the other extreme fund managers exploit loopholes to cut their income taxes in half.
The solution to this puzzle is to realize that economic inequality is not just one thing. It consists of some things that are bad, like kids with no chance of reaching their potential, and others that are good, like Larry Page and Sergey Brin starting the company you use to find things online.
If you want to understand economic inequality — and more importantly, if you actually want to fix the bad aspects of it — you have to tease apart the components.
And yet the trend in nearly everything written about the subject is to do the opposite: Sometimes this is done for ideological reasons. Sometimes it's because the writer only has very high-level data and so draws conclusions from that, like the proverbial drunk who looks for his keys under the lamppost, instead of where he dropped them, because the light is better there.
This report on the history of the Ku Klux Klan, America’s first terrorist organization, was prepared by the Klanwatch Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Klanwatch was formed in to help curb Klan and racist violence through litigation, education and monitoring. Issue of Poverty in the World Essay - The Irish Government's National Action Plan for Social Inclusion defines poverty as: "People are living in poverty if their income and resources (material, cultural and social) are so inadequate as to preclude them from having a standard of living which is regarded as acceptable by society generally. Poverty is the scarcity or the lack of a certain (variant) amount of material possessions or money. Poverty is a multifaceted concept, which may include social, economic, and political elements. Absolute poverty, extreme poverty, or destitution refers to the complete lack of the means necessary to meet basic personal needs such as food, clothing and shelter.
Sometimes it's because the writer doesn't understand critical aspects of inequality, like the role of technology in wealth creation. Much of the time, perhaps most of the time, writing about economic inequality combines all three.
The most naive version of which is the one based on the pie fallacy: Usually this is an assumption people start from rather than a conclusion they arrive at by examining the evidence. Sometimes the pie fallacy is stated explicitly: But the unconscious form is very widespread.
I think because we grow up in a world where the pie fallacy is actually true. To kids, wealth is a fixed pie that's shared out, and if one person gets more it's at the expense of another.
It takes a conscious effort to remind oneself that the real world doesn't work that way. In the real world you can create wealth as well as taking it from others. A woodworker creates wealth. He makes a chair, and you willingly give him money in return for it. A high-frequency trader does not.
He makes a dollar only when someone on the other end of a trade loses a dollar. If the rich people in a society got that way by taking wealth from the poor, then you have the degenerate case of economic inequality, where the cause of poverty is the same as the cause of wealth.
But instances of inequality don't have to be instances of the degenerate case. If one woodworker makes 5 chairs and another makes none, the second woodworker will have less money, but not because anyone took anything from him. Even people sophisticated enough to know about the pie fallacy are led toward it by the custom of describing economic inequality as a ratio of one quantile's income or wealth to another's.
It's so easy to slip from talking about income shifting from one quantile to another, as a figure of speech, into believing that is literally what's happening. Except in the degenerate case, economic inequality can't be described by a ratio or even a curve.
In the general case it consists of multiple ways people become poor, and multiple ways people become rich. Which means to understand economic inequality in a country, you have to go find individual people who are poor or rich and figure out why.
This is one way I know the rich aren't all getting richer simply from some new system for transferring wealth to them from everyone else. When you use the would-have method with startup founders, you find what most would have done back inwhen economic inequality was lower, was to join big companies or become professors.
Before Mark Zuckerberg started Facebook, his default expectation was that he'd end up working at Microsoft.While your essay if well written and well argued, I failed to see any alternative offered to replace or at least to begin replacing/changing our current capitalist system.
With member countries, staff from more than countries, and offices in over locations, the World Bank Group is a unique global partnership: five institutions working for sustainable solutions that reduce poverty and build shared prosperity in developing countries.
Try Our Friends At: The Essay Store. Free English School Essays. We have lots of essays in our essay database, so please check back here frequently to see the newest additions. The UN’s Philip Alston is an expert on deprivation – and he wants to know why 41m Americans are living in poverty. The Guardian joined him on a special two-week mission into the dark heart of.
In discussing poverty in the United States, the following essay utilizes three major perspectives: the general condition, the emerging middle class poverty and the relationship between small businesses and strategic measures to alleviate poverty/5(80).
Progress in poverty reduction has been concentrated in Asia, and especially, East Asia, with the major improvement occurring in China.
|The World Bank Group has two goals,||Among such challenges as hunger, wars, natural disasters, and pollution, poverty is one of the most significant problems; in fact, it is a scourge of many developing countries. Therefore, understanding and eliminating the reasons of why poverty is still present in the world is important.|
Hunger around the world. There are many factors that are assumed to be root causes for the existence of poverty in the world.