October, 2009

Egalitarianism Doesn’t Care About Desert, and Neither Does the Market

by Elizabeth Anderson
The Conversation
October 22nd, 2009

Lane Kenworthy claims that, even after we do what it takes to ensure equal opportunity and remove obvious injustices, we still have a compelling reason to redistribute income because so much inequality is due to sheer luck. John Nye argues that we can never have enough evidence to distinguish what people deserve from what they [...]

Read: Egalitarianism Doesn’t Care About Desert, and Neither Does the Market

Nye on Positional Goods and the Paradox of Growth

by Will Wilkinson
The Conversation
October 22nd, 2009

Before I reply to John Nye’s fascinating essay, I want to mention that I probably wouldn’t be writing about inequality if not for John. My views on the subject have been greatly shaped by a conversation we’ve been having on and off for almost ten years now. And a lot of what little I know [...]

Read: Nye on Positional Goods and the Paradox of Growth

What Does Income Inequality Tell Us?

by John V. C. Nye
The Conversation
October 22nd, 2009

Lane Kenworthy gets to the heart of the matter. He states that even after we correct for discrimination, basic health and welfare needs, et cetera, if inequality continues to rise, it should be cause for redistribution. He says, “luck’s influence means that redistribution is a justifiable remedy.” I disagree. Moreover, I believe that we do [...]

Read: What Does Income Inequality Tell Us?

Kenworthy on Consumption and the Value of Savings

by Will Wilkinson
The Conversation
October 21st, 2009

I’m immensely grateful to professors Kenworthy, Nye, and Anderson for such thoughtful, challenging replies to my initial contribution. I could spend days responding in detail to each essay — and I probably will! I’d intended to write a relatively short omnibus post touching on one or two points in each of the reaction essays, but in the interest of getting the informal [...]

Read: Kenworthy on Consumption and the Value of Savings

Is Redistribution the Wrong Cure?

by Lane Kenworthy
The Conversation
October 21st, 2009

In my initial comment I addressed Will Wilkinson’s contention that consumption inequality is much more important than income inequality. Here I turn to his central argument, which is in the second half of his essay. Will argues that regardless of the degree to which inequality has risen, focusing on it is a distraction from the [...]

Read: Is Redistribution the Wrong Cure?

What Should Egalitarians Want?

by Elizabeth Anderson
Reaction Essay
October 19th, 2009

Elizabeth Anderson agrees with Wilkinson that the root causes of inequality are more troubling than inequality taken alone. But economic inequality is still a problem for two reasons: First, economic inequality of the sort we have today is not making the poor better off in absolute terms, but rather it is making them worse off. And second, economic inequality translates directly into inequality of political power, which in turn reinforces economic inequality. This is an unacceptable state of affairs.

Read: What Should Egalitarians Want?

Why Things Will Feel Worse As They Get Better: The Downside of Growing Consumption Equality

by John V. C. Nye
Reaction Essay
October 16th, 2009

John Nye adds several considerations to the mix: First, positional goods may make us feel more unequal — there are only so many “top ten” schools for our kids, only so many “best” views or neighborhoods. Yet, with rising incomes, more of us feel that we should be able to afford them, even as they slip further from our grasp. As we become more equal, we feel less equal.

And third, much of human inequality is not directly measurable in money at all. Differences in appearance, intelligence, ability, and the like are all real and may translate into economic inequality as well. Consideration of these elements is curiously absent from many discussions on inequality.

Read: Why Things Will Feel Worse As They Get Better: The Downside of Growing Consumption Equality

Is Consumption the Grail for Inequality Skeptics?

by Lane Kenworthy
Reaction Essay
October 14th, 2009

Lane Kenworthy argues that income inequality is indeed important, and that we should not be misled by the relatively reassuring data on consumption. Unconsumed income also adds to the quality of life enjoyed by the rich, even if that increase is still hard to measure. A more egalitarian society need not entail a radical social leveling, but it should entail better public services for the poor and the middle class.

Read: Is Consumption the Grail for Inequality Skeptics?