Wednesday, July 15, 2009

Thinking about (un)equality; a matter of science or of politics?

A matter of both of course!
A matter of politics as it puts in place the policies that steer in either direction; and a matter of science whether it succeeds in its mission to paint a clear picture of what the tangible and actual results of those policies are.
And it may surprise you that scientific inquiry can do quite a good job in that respect as this website will proof to those who can see:

The Equality Trust

(In)equality is defined here in terms of income inequalities within a society.
These studies originated from an inquiry into the parameters of physical health in various societies.
The amount of (in)equality appeared to be a key-factor.
And so it is regarding ten more social and health problems ranging from mental health to drug abuse and from obesity to violence.
The figures presented here are rather consistent and telling.
One would almost thank Friedman, Reagan and Tatcher for letting it show so obviously that their socio-economic ideas are flawed, fraudulent and in the end harmfull to society.
Alas as yet we cannot thank their liberal and social-democratic counterparts for pin-pointing these correlations and reversing the trend to more equal and coherent societies.

As for critical questions you may find some thoughts and answers here:
FAQs on Inequality

In the last decade running up to the present financial and subsequent economical crisis we have seen a steady increase in income inequalities throughout the Western world. The number of millionaires was ever increasing though not as fast as the number of people now being poorer than before, top-managers through their bonusses and hedgefunds through their perverse activities have drained billions of dollars out of the economy and continue to do so on a more modest scale.
If this immense amount of money had gone to the poorest 20% of the population it would now be flowing through the economy and so create a healthy and robust economy. While now the rich mainly sit on it afraid they will become a little poorer or spending it on outrageous luxury thus creating a sick and vulnerable economy.
I must yet hear the first economist elaborate on this obvious assumption, but then economy is not really or has ever been a science, wouldn't you agree?

.

No comments:

Post a Comment