To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors

Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by microcolonel on Sunday September 03, 2017 @02:26PM (#15162980)

> Strong social safety nets of the Scandinavian variety do reduce post-transfer poverty (less so inequality)

Granted Scandinavian countries, now more just Norway and Denmark, tend to have very low potential for poverty in general. The rate would likely be comparatively low even without the programmes. Norway and Denmark have both considerably reduced entitlements over the years to relieve the enormous stress they put on the economy.

Well before any of these programmes became so comprehensive, Norway, Denmark, and Sweden were very productive and comparatively equal.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by JamesBarney on Sunday September 03, 2017 @02:35PM (#15163021)

I think we can agree "when you give poor people money to spend, they don't end up spending more money" is an extraordinary claim. And so should need an extraordinary amount of evidence to back it up. Can you point me in the right direction to some more information about how this could possibly be true?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by yorwba on Sunday September 03, 2017 @04:23PM (#15163673)

I don't see anyone upthread making that claim you are challenging. Could you point me to the comment you meant to respond to?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:To Understand Rising Inequality, Consider Janitors by JamesBarney on Sunday September 03, 2017 @07:27PM (#15164571)

Many of the comments up thread said redistribution doesn't work. Working is defined as reducing poverty levels which is literally measured by how much money they spend. And redistribution is literally giving poor people money.

I.e. giving poor people money doesn't end up with the poor spending more money.

[ Parent | on HN ]