So goes the headline:“Rich getting richer, study finds”
Good, because I don’t think the poor are hiring anyone.
This repeating of this pedantic argument was overdue, anyway. It involved the RELATIVE differences in earnings. In other words, if you eliminate wealth in this statistical model, the rate of poverty falls. Not REAL poverty, just the poverty identified as that called out RELATIVE to the richest earner.
In fact, the fascinating thing about this notion is that if the rich REALLY DO get richer, and the middle income earners are impoverished, it still shows a drop in RELATIVE poverty – which they are using to calculate the rate of poverty.
That’s to be made distinct from ACTUAL poverty. Absolute social success in the “income gap” model means that everyone is poor, especially since they no longer have anyone to work for, short of a central government who will have to RAISE THE TAXES ON THE POOR to fund the milk of human kindness, which, at that point, usually requires that you know someone to have access to.What does growing income inequality mean for society? Koedijk said he feared it could undermine social cohesion. Those on top, particularly in finance, can do as they please for the rest of their life after landing a top position. This leaves them free from entering into any long-term commitments.
Which is known to Americans as “owning your fate” and freedom from government dependency. It doesn’t require a great deal of wealth to achieve, just common sense, a ken for saving and investing, and a liberated mind. In fact it’s very “middle class” once you walk off of the plantation of the left.
No comments:
Post a Comment