by kublikhan » Wed 03 Oct 2018, 10:17:03
Outcast_Searcher, the
UN report does not "blame the whole issue on Trump". Yes, it mentions recent policy actions by the current administration are making inequality worse. But it says this has been a problem for decades:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he United States has the highest rate of income inequality among Western countries.
For almost five decades the overall policy response has been neglectful at best, but the policies pursued over the past year seem deliberately designed to remove basic protections from the poorest, punish those who are not in employment and make even basic health care into a privilege to be earned rather than a right of citizenship.
Report of the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights on his mission to the United States of AmericaAlso, I would ask you to dial back your own politicizing of this issue. Every other post on this topic you have "Left" this or "Right" that. Whereas my posts were comparing the US as a whole to other countries.
And as far as the tech sector explanation for this goes, that explanation doesn't fly when all the other developed countries manage to limit income/wealth disparity even after the tech revolution.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')ealth disparity in the United States is running twice as wide — and more — as wealth gaps in the rest of the industrial world. The middle class in the United States has less than half the wealth share of middle classes in much of the rest of the developed world.
Facts: Global Inequality$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')t’s hard to exaggerate the difference between western Europe and the USA when it comes to inequality. In 1980, these blocs of similar population and average income were also similar in income inequality: the top 1% captured around 10% of national income, while the poorest 50% took around 20%. Things have changed dramatically since then. Today, the top 1% in Europe take 12% of income (in the US, 20%) while the bottom 50% have 22% (in the US, 10%).
It’s often said that globalisation and digitalisation explain the surge in global inequality, but that’s not a very convincing narrative. Since the 1980s, Europe and the US have had similar exposure to global markets and new technologies. But they have differed in policies and institutional direction. To date, Europe has shown that it’s much better at keeping inequality in check.
social healthcare systems in most European countries still guarantee universal protection for all – hardly the case in the US. Many of those countries offer free access to university. Indeed, when policymakers in Bavaria attempted to introduce university fees in 2007, a referendum later overturned the decision. A young European’s hopes of receiving higher education depend much less on his or her parents’ income than their American counterpart’s.
Labour markets are also more favourable to workers in Europe than in the US, where the minimum wage has fallen by a third in real terms since the 1970s (in France it has risen fourfold). In Sweden and Germany, trade unions are represented in corporate governance bodies, taking part in strategic decision-making.
European regulation against lethal, polluting substances is stricter than elsewhere, and European countries are at the forefront of the global fight against climate change, investing a growing share of their GDP in energy efficiency and renewables. That’s also key to reducing inequality, now and in the future. Studies show that environmental degradation and inequality are closely linked.
Generous welfare states need to be financed, of course. Europe is a patchwork of taxation systems. But overall the continent has been good at protecting progressive taxation – which has not been the case in the US, Britain and also countries such as India, where inequality has mushroomed. Progressive taxation is a proven tool against entrenched privileges at the very top; it also helps finance investment and public expenditure designed to lift income levels at the bottom.
The EU has been instrumental in helping its poorer member states, and its low-income regions, catch up with those that are better off. The picture is not perfect, but EU cohesion funds have done a lot to fill some of the gaps and help its newer members.
And as for the claim that all groups have benefited over the years but some groups have benefited more, better check your facts again:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')etween 1963 and 2016 families near the bottom of the wealth distribution (those at the 10th percentile) went from having no wealth on average to being about $1,000 in debt.