If you frequent mainstream right-libertarian publications on anything like a regular basis, you’ve probably seen more than one of those breathless articles about how capitalism is making the ordinary poor person richer than a medieval king.
Articles: economic inequality (61)
“Wealthy friends and neighbours”, he writes, “it is time to come home”, and “to come out of your gated communities and gated hearts”.
So, what was that "something" that changed everything in the early 1970s?
Would a fairer distribution of income worldwide diminish the damage humans are doing to the earth?
The ability to harness energy creates wealth and confers social power.
But beyond theory and the existence of alternatives that go beyond Keynesian patches, the narrative of the “guaranteed minimum income” (previously known as “basic income”) hides a good part of its moral, social, and political costs.
“Building new political, economic and cultural systems and societies that are metabolically restorative, equitable, resilient, just, diverse and democratic. It is a challenge that could bring the different peoples of the world together, to build something better together and make history …
Inequality represents simultaneously a cornerstone and a weak link in today's capitalism.
There is compelling evidence that economic inequality is both a result of, and contributor to, economic crises.
What has become of the great promise of social change raised by the “movements of the squares” of 2011?