The second point that the concentration is beyond a reasonable reflection of effort and contribution is tougher to dismiss or approve. Valuing a contribution of a new technology or business model is very theoretical and then forming a sound opinion of reasonableness would require wisdom beyond our normal practice. However one can assume that most people would agree that lifetime earnings beyond some threshold of say or is outsized although not immoral in itself. The third point that some having more means that others have less is dismissed on the basis that those with more are productive and have grown and will grow the economy for all including the others.
However the evidence is not convincing that greater inequality leads to growth in fact it may be that greater inequality may slow grow and may be causal to social unrest which certainly does cause slow growth. approach of Chinese Overseas America Number Data doing nothing and let what will be be the current climate change approach in certain countries or revolutionizing income and wealth distribution. The safer and saner approach is a series of incremental changes followed by pauses to assess their impacts and followed by further course corrections. Good first steps would be campaign law reform with perhaps a constitutional amendment in the case of.
US an additional corporate tax on income in excess of say an additional tax on personal income world wide in excess of say a reduction of income tax of of income less than say and increased government expenditures directly or through vouchers on human capital including early education and neo natal health care. Then every decade there could be further public debate and incremental adjustments. MARLON BURGESS CEO MDG HEALTH SOLUTIONS Makes for interesting debate now matter how you re positioned. Hopefully out of these debates mature solutions to real problems in the world will emerge.
發表於 2024-3-12 12:08:16
收藏