Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis want to redirect egalitarianism away from redistribution of income and toward redistribution of assets, particularly productive assets. <1> Their main reason, apart from the fact that income redistribution is so obviously dead in the political waters, is that income redistribution lowers productivity and competitiveness, while asset redistribution raises these, and in the long run the welfare of the worst-off depends more on increasing productivity than it does on distribution. Compound interest is a wonderful thing. Young workers in an inegalitarian society growing at 5% per year making half the wages of those in an egalitarian society growing at 1/2% per year will catch up in 16 years and by the time of their retirement will have four times the income. Bowles and Gintis argue that such mathematics, which has long been an argument for inegalitarian trickle-down policies, in fact supports egalitarian asset redistributions.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Egalitarianism Reconsidered.Daniel M. Hausman & Matt Sensat Waldren - 2011 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 8 (4):567-586.
Supply‐Side Vs. Demand‐Side Tax Cuts and U.S. Economic Growth, 1951–2004.Norton Garfinkle - 2005 - Critical Review 17 (3-4):427-448.
Why Libertarianism is Mistaken.Hugh LaFollette - 1979 - In John Arthur & William Shaw (eds.), Justice and Economic Distribution (2nd). Prentice-Hall.
Egalitarianism and Welfare-State Redistribution.Daniel Shapiro - 2002 - Social Philosophy and Policy 19 (1):1-35.
Relocating the Responsibility Cut: Should More Responsibility Imply Less Redistribution?Alexander W. Cappelen & Bertil Tungodden - 2006 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 5 (3):353-362.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads27 ( #189,297 of 2,170,016 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #345,417 of 2,170,016 )
How can I increase my downloads?