2 ms·
Not sure why you're downvoted. It's a good question. I think the main reasoning is that if that were true, then we'd see that magnitude of inequality across m
by tunesmith 13y ago
Not sure why you're downvoted. It's a good question. I think the main reasoning is that if that were true, then we'd see that magnitude of inequality across much longer periods of time (rather than only growing over the last 40-50 years). But that assumption might be false, also.
I know that the inequality is accompanied by all sorts of bad acting that has helped "cause" it, but I think that's beside the point. I wonder more if there's some reasonable policy we could have put in place that would have actually kept things consistent with where they were in the 60's and 70's, or if larger system elements were already in play that would have overwhelmed things even if our various bits of deregulation hadn't happened.
- joelrunyon 13y agoNot sure why the downvotes either. Was an honest question...