Relative vs Absolute Income

When I asked Owen what he meant by left wing, he said:

I mean designed to reduce inequality of income and wealth, and reduce the privileges of wealth.

So here's my question to egalitarians of this sort:

1. If this is your aim, and this is the aim, then why not Communism?
2. Does absolute poverty tend to fall in economically free countries?
3. Is it better to be absolutely poor but relatively rich (i.e. in the top 20% of the wealth distribution in a developing country) or absolutely rich but relatively poor (i.e. in the bottom 20% of the wealth distribution in a developed country)
4. Would people rather receive a percentage of the average income, rather than a monetary amount?

Poverty does matter. But I think that the best way to eliminate it is to facilitate a free economy that produces prosperity that everyone shares in - we all benefit from innovation and competition. The fact is, in Britain today the very poorest among us can afford to feed themselves, and to live with a roof over their head. The very poorest have a higher standard of living then the very rich of years past. To me, that's amazing, and should be acknowledged.

Regarding point 1, I don't mean this to be flippant. If you don't want Communism, then what other aims of left-wing policy outweigh the objectives of the most important policy?
Regarding 2, I think the evidence shows this is empirically true.
Point 3 - surely patterns of global migration show that people are more concerned with absolute poverty? Otherwise why don't people from Toxteth move to Sierra Leone and live like lords?
Point 4 - The typical debate is that individualists claim "people should only care about absolute income", whereas egalitarians claim "people do care about relative income, so it's important". So would people rather be paid a salary of £xx% of the average, rather than £xx? If someone were told that they had a raise that is "120% of the average", would they not ask how much that was?

Comments

[josephgrossberg]

re: #1, I would imagine there is some notion of an ideal "balance" between unchecked capitalism and oppressive socialism.

But if you really want to know (I'm hardly a fan of ambitious government involvement in the economy), read lefty blogs for a little while and then, when a tangent post is made, submit your question.

[AJE]

I don't want to sound obnoxious, but "unchecked capitalism" is an oxymoron - it doesn't exist, and couldn't exist.

This is the reason I don't *get* egalitarians: they claim that equality of income and wealth is the ideal, but acknowledge that attempts to actively achieve it lead to terrible outcomes. It's a pretty wierd utopia, if the adherents don't actually want it....

[dearieme]

The most obvious way to remove all inequalities is to kill everyone. On reflection, it is the only way, otherwise it leaves uncorrected the greatest inequality of all, between the quick and the dead. iF YOU THINK THAT TOO SWEEPING, WHAT ABOUT THE REAlly painful inequalities - between those blessed with good health, or beauty, or popularity, or contentment, and those who are not? Socialism is such a narrow, materialist way of looking at things, don't you think?

[keith]

Ha pasado casualmente al foro y ha visto este tema. Puedo ayudarle por el consejo. Juntos podemos llegar a la respuesta correcta.
http://www.sexfg.com/

mile

[Cheap Jordan 1]

Thanks for sharing. This website is to I too have to help. Very good.

[Abarnesnore]

Thanks for your article. I also feel that laptop computers have grown to be more and more popular right now, and now tend to be the only type of computer included in a household. The reason is that at the same time that they are becoming more and more affordable, their computing power is growing to the point where they're as strong as http://www.newugg-outletshop.com>Ugg Classic Boots personal computers out of just a few years back.

I have seen a lot of useful issues on your internet site about personal computers. However, I have the viewpoint that laptops are still not quite powerful enough to be a option if you typically do things that require plenty of power, for instance video enhancing. But for internet surfing, word processing, and many other prevalent computer work they are fine, provided you cannot mind the small screen size. Appreciate sharing your opinions.

I have mastered some new items http://www.newugg-outletshop.com>Ugg Classic Boots from your web-site about pc's. Another thing I've always believed is that computers have become an item that each residence must have for many reasons. They provide convenient ways in which to organize homes, pay bills, shop, study, pay attention to music and perhaps watch television shows. An innovative technique to complete many of these tasks is a mobile computer. These computers are mobile, small, robust and transportable.

Thanks for enabling me to attain new thoughts about desktops. I also contain the belief that certain of the best ways to keep your notebook computer in perfect condition is by using a hard plastic-type material case, or maybe shell, that matches over the top of one's computer. These types of protective gear are model targeted since they are manufactured to fit perfectly over the natural housing. You can buy them directly from the seller, or via third party sources if they are readily available for your mobile computer, however its not all laptop may have a spend on the market. Once more, thanks for your recommendations.

Thanks for revealing your ideas in this article. The other factor is that any time a problem comes up with a computer system motherboard, individuals should not take the risk involving repairing that themselves because if it is not done right it can lead to irreparable damage to the full laptop. In most cases, it is safe just to approach your dealer of that laptop for that repair of motherboard. They have got technicians who've an http://www.newugg-outletshop.com>Cheap Uggs experience in dealing with pc motherboard issues and can make the right analysis and perform repairs.