Who should be bailed out?, por Chris Dillow:
The interesting thing here is the political aspect. If tax-payers should help protect the rich (or once-rich) from suffering from problems of their own making, isn’t there a more pressing requirement - in justice at least - to protect the poor from suffering as a result of forces beyond their control.
And these forces are large. Half, or maybe more, of inequality in lifetime earnings is determined by the age of 18 - by genetic endowments and schooling. These causes of relative poverty are far more beyond the control of the poor than banks' losses are beyond the control of the rich.
So, if it’s a legitimate, just, use of tax-payers money to support banks, it must be even more just to use it to eliminate at least half of inequality.
(...)
I know, I know. I’m missing the point. This bail-out has nothing all to do with justice, but is (arguably) necessary to ensure economic stability.
But this only reminds us of some important facts. A capitalist economy is very different from a free market. Capitalism has nothing to do with justice. And if you want the state to help you out, you must appeal not to rulers’ sense of justice, but to their fear.
Worker Bailout Fund? por Mark Thoma:
In response to the financial crisis, as we help firms that are deemed too big and too interconnected to fail, hundreds of billions of dollars are being tossed around as though it is mere pennies.
Since it is widely expected that the crisis will get worse before it gets better, and since there is a non-trivial chance of a substantial uptick in unemployment, shouldn't we begin thinking about a worker bailout fund?
Or are workers too little to be helped?
No comments:
Post a Comment