|
Utente
|
Messaggio
|
VivianHat
   | Giovedi 03 Febbraio 2022 - 05:30
Thomas Piketty: "inequality is not natural".:
Thomas Piketty: "inequality is not natural".
[url=https://www.rxshopmd.com/products/antinarcoleptic/buy-modafinil-modalert/]modafinil for sale uk[/url]
п»ї<title>Thomas Piketty: "inequality is not natural".</title>
[IMG]https://lamenteesmaravillosa.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/thomas-piketty.png[/IMG]
Thomas Piketty is one of the most important economists in the world and one of the most appreciated contemporary thinkers in different sectors. This French economist, a specialist in inequality and income distribution, has received several awards for his work and is undoubtedly one of those authors worth knowing.
As can be expected, Thomas Piketty has been a sharp critic of the neoliberal system. This system, which was imposed almost everywhere in the world in recent decades, proposed the idea that the progress of the market would generate progress for all. Reality seems to show the opposite, since poverty and inequality have increased almost everywhere in the world.
Several of Thomas Pikety's ideas are considered revolutionary. One of the central points of his speech has to do with inequality, a phenomenon that has increased in the world and that for this thinker is the result of the system itself and not a natural result, as it has often been made to appear.
"The distribution of property is a crucial issue in the 21st century."
-Thomas Piketty
Thomas Piketty and the imbalanceIn his various works, many of which have been passionately read by people of all latitudes, Thomas Piketty points out that there was a brutal empire of capital until the First World War. There was no way for anyone to rise socially unless they bowed to big capital, either through inheritance or through the path of corruption.
After the Great War, other codes were installed in Europe. Work and study became the determining factors in improving economic conditions. However, it returned to a situation of great social inequality.
After that period, and particularly since the 1980s, this trend was reversed. From the economic point of view, it returned to the theses of the 19th century and once again big capital became the axis of the economy and politics. The consequence of this has been, above all, abysmal inequality.
Piketty says that while in 1950 the owner earned 20 times more than his employees, in 2011 he earned 6,000 times more.
Inequality is not naturalThomas Piketty created an interactive database with data on the evolution of income in more than 20 countries over a period of almost three centuries. At the time of his work, most economists agreed that inequality had increased around the world. What the data showed, however, was that inequality had become extreme: immoral.
Piketty proved that the richest 1% in the United States had doubled their wealth in the 20th century and that they held in their hands 20% of the national income. Thanks to proven data such as this, the economist was able to argue that the concentration of capital is only possible if there is a simultaneous massive impoverishment of the people.
However, why is it that in the framework of a liberal system, such as the one that prevailed during the Great War, there was greater equity? Piketty thinks that this was only due to the fact that during the two world wars the enemy sides systematically attacked the centers of big capital. It was a fortuitous event that temporarily brought about greater equality.
A progressive capitalismThomas Piketty points out that the state and the tax system play a fundamental role in mitigating or increasing inequality. When the gap is too wide, it can lead to high-risk situations, as happened in 1929. This not only meant a great economic depression, but also strengthened anti-democratic sectors such as fascism, Nazism and communism.
Piketty's proposal is social-democratic. Obviously, this is not a new position, but it is the first time that it is supported by figures and mathematical formulas. It is not a question of prohibiting private property, but of setting precise limits to it. Along the same lines as Keynes, he points out that the State must regulate and limit this absurd concentration of capital by means of heavy taxes on capital.
Such taxes would serve to compensate those who have the least and prevent social differences from reaching intolerable limits. Blaming the poor for their situation and exalting multimillionaires, even if their only merit has been to receive an inheritance, are some of the ideological means that have been used to keep inequality intact.
What Thomas Piketty proposes is a progressive capitalism, or participatory socialism, based on two pillars: "Social ownership and the sharing of voting rights in companies and, on the other hand, temporary ownership and the circulation of capital". This would make it possible to design societies that are more cooperative and stable, but, above all, truly democratic.
You might be interested in...
Is charity the same as solidarity?
Solidarity, today, is something that is deeply rooted and normalized in society, but how is it different from charity?
https://www.rxshopmd.com/products/antinarcoleptic/buy-armodafinil-artvigil/
[url=https://forumbilding.ru/viewtopic.php?pid=7600#p7600]Reducing choices, improving decisions[/url]
[url=http://tnfnorth.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4241]Disgust, a forgotten emotion[/url]
[url=https://harnroehrenverengung-forum.de/bourgierung/what-will-you-regret-in-the-future/new/#new]What will you regret in the future?[/url]
a1305e0 |
|
|
|
