Your feedback is important to us!
We invite all our readers to share with us their views and comments about this article.
Disclaimer: Comments submitted by third parties on this site are the sole responsibility of the individual(s) whose content is submitted. The Daily Star accepts no responsibility for the content of comment(s), including, without limitation, any error, omission or inaccuracy therein. Please note that your email address will NOT appear on the site.
Alert: If you are facing problems with posting comments, please note that you must verify your email with Disqus prior to posting a comment. follow this link to make sure your account meets the requirements. (http://bit.ly/vDisqus)
Around the world, the effects of alarmingly high economic inequality are spilling over into politics and society.The World Bank has shown that 766 million people – around 10 percent of the global population – were still living below the extreme-poverty threshold of $1.90 per day as of 2013 .Hughes ended up rooming with Zuckerberg, which was sheer luck.Hughes' solution to the problem of inequality is to tax the rich in order to provide a guaranteed minimum income to the lower and middle classes. To understand the logic and morality of inequality, it is worth digging further into what Hughes says about luck. It is not just that one part of his wealth is due to luck; rather, all of it is. Luck determined that Hughes would be smart enough to get into Harvard and then meet Zuckerberg once there. Thus, the primacy of luck as a determinant of wealth means that there is no moral justification for economic inequality.Today's unacceptably high inequality demands interventions to improve education and health, as well as redistributive taxation of the kind that Hughes recommends; but it also requires us to tolerate some income disparities to keep people and economies working.
language of conflict
Policymakers should fear
The urgent case for creating a global constitution
FOLLOW THIS ARTICLE