Gulf between rich and poor increases risk of climate breakdown as well as entrenches poverty, says letter to UN and World Bank

The letter says: “We know that high inequality undermines all our social and environmental goals. It corrodes our politics, destroys trust, hamstrings our collective economic prosperity and weakens multilateralism. We also know that without a sharp reduction in inequality, the twin goals of ending poverty and preventing climate breakdown will be in clear conflict.”

  • sovietcreditcard@lemmy.worldEnglish
    25·
    1 year ago

    Bingo. Pretty much any non-Marxist economists will favor “the market” over workers. Neoliberalism, the predominant ideology in most western countries, is seen as an alternative to conservatism (very much so in the US), but they’re centrists at best, and conservative-lite at worst.

    • livus@kbin.social
      19·
      1 year ago

      This is a case of “perfect is the enemy of good”.

      This thing was signed by a bunch of non-US economists like Thomas Picketty and people like Helen Clark, a left politician who used to run the UN Development Programme.

      Economic neoliberal bias, sure, but what they are proposing is still an order of magnitude better than what we have now.

      Edit: I can’t see anything below this in this comment chain, not even my own comments!

      Not sure if it’s a kbin bug or if @hglman blocked me. (Is this the effect blocking has in the fediverse? Can you guys still see the rest of the chain?)

      • hglman@lemmy.ml
        3·
        1 year ago

        Pointing out how it can be better is not the enemy of the good; your concern trolling is.

        • livus@kbin.social
          10·
          1 year ago

          Huh? This isn’t reddit. I’m not a “concern troll”. I’m just an ordinary person who happens to disagree with you about something.

          I’m not a fan of economic neoliberalism either, but I would rather an international group of economists demanded anti- inequality measures than nothing.

        • livus@kbin.social
          3·
          1 year ago

          Yeah I know, not by some standards, really depends on your Overton window.

          She led a majority government on centre-left policies in New Zealand so that still meant she was in charge of a Monetarist economy with all the neoliberal economics that implies, but she also presided over a massive tax revenue transfer to working class families that is still going on today.

    • Veraxus@kbin.social
      8·
      1 year ago

      Exactly. Neo/liberalism is just right-wing feudalism with extra steps. If you allow (let alone encourage) the unmitigated consolidation of wealth (and therefore authority) you will ALWAYS move society rightward. Hence the term “Late-stage Capitalism”.

      Economies require trade and incentive to thrive, but there must be limits to how much a person or entity can accrue.

    • CorruptBuddha@lemmy.caEnglish
      2·
      1 year ago

      Pretty much any non-Marxist economists will favor “the market” over workers.

      Just going to point out that “the market” is people’s freedom of choice compounded across society.

      Neoliberalism, the predominant ideology in most western countries, is seen as an alternative to conservatism (very much so in the US), but they’re centrists at best, and conservative-lite at worst.

      It’s almost like political parties are tied to the values of their voters.