tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1859345528889981553.post8684438031930670448..comments2023-10-19T01:44:50.017+01:00Comments on Liberal Polemic: For ye have the poor always with youLiberal Polemichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05002372579024659424noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1859345528889981553.post-73826044351445722392007-05-23T12:22:00.000+01:002007-05-23T12:22:00.000+01:00Interesting and important debate. Another dimensio...Interesting and important debate. Another dimension we need to consider is the question of our measures of inequality. Calssically, do we measure income of individuals or of households? Should incomes be adjusted in poverty statistics to take account of household needs? <BR/><BR/>If we are to have a serious debate I think we also need to make sure everyone understands the concept of a Lorenz Curve and why this is central to current debates on welfare policy effectiveness.<BR/><BR/>For my part I note that the Model of perfect Competition so many Market Advocates rely on does not support innovation and enterpreneurship, (a point strongy made by von Hayek incidentially) so changing enterpreneurial economies will not be Pareto Efficient. They will have market failures and externalities which can lead to disporortionate negate effects on those with the least resources at their command. <BR/><BR/>It is the job of public authorities - governments or reasonable substitutes - to 'balance the values of liberty, equality and community' and make sure that there are countervailing influences to imperfect markets.Edishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10852931736127760026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1859345528889981553.post-5155554777300707202007-05-22T21:37:00.000+01:002007-05-22T21:37:00.000+01:00Tom,a more thorough version than mine, and with ad...Tom,<BR/><BR/>a more thorough version than mine, and with added pictures.<BR/><BR/>Much of my limited thinking on this topic came originally from a reading of <A HREF="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Social-Justice-Rights-Public-Policy/dp/1846220033/ref=sr_1_2/203-6836715-0417520?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1179866010&sr=8-2" REL="nofollow">this title</A>.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1859345528889981553.post-61925221130525078092007-05-22T21:00:00.000+01:002007-05-22T21:00:00.000+01:00Actually, Patrick, most of your quote from the con...Actually, Patrick, most of your quote from the constitution is entirely in line with what I said.<BR/><BR/>As long as government meddling does not undermine social mobility (as has happened with, for example, the state run education system) then people are free to lift themselves out of "poverty, ignorance or conformity", as used to be the case before the first great wave of Labour interventionism. If one is free to improve one's own life, one is not enslaved. <BR/><BR/>Similarly, "freedom, dignity and well-being" are best achieved by treating people equally before the law and freeing them to make the choices that best improve their lives.<BR/><BR/>It is, as the preamble so eloquently states, "the role of the state... <I>to enable</I> ... citizens to attain these ideals", not to hand it to some on a plate by confiscating the property of others. That is not liberty, it is tyranny.<BR/><BR/>The preamble does not "commit the party to active government intervention to optimise life chances". It commits the party to <I>help people</I> optimise <I> their own</I> life chances.<BR/><BR/>The "I'm all right jack" tendency (actually first coined about the Unions’ use of labour laws to benefit their members at the expense of non-unionised workers) is of course unpleasant, but it far preferable to the use of the state to feed our envy.<BR/><BR/>In fact, only a fool would want to exclude others from making the best of their lives. One persons’ success has a knock-on effect that benefits society. We are all richer when one of us does better; that is the Invisible Hand at work. <BR/><BR/>But if you believe that the reason why some fare better than others is because the privileged are grinding down the deprived, then the best way to ensure that nobody can exclude others from bettering themselves is to free people to maximise "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" through their own means. <BR/><BR/><I>That</I> is the role of the state.Liberal Polemichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05002372579024659424noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1859345528889981553.post-51198748972829797302007-05-22T13:43:00.000+01:002007-05-22T13:43:00.000+01:00>>A fair Britain does not mean that everybody has ...>>A fair Britain does not mean that everybody has the same or a broadly similar amount of wealth. It means that everybody, no matter their wealth, is treated equally by the state.<<<<BR/><BR/>On one definition, perhaps. But <BR/><BR/>"...we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no-one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity. We champion the freedom, dignity and well-being of individuals, we acknowledge and respect their right to freedom of conscience and their right to develop their talents to the full. We aim to disperse power, to foster diversity and to nurture creativity. We believe that the role of the state is to enable all citizens to attain these ideals, to contribute fully to their communities and to take part in the decisions which affect their lives" also commits the party to active government intervention to optimise life chances, which is great deal more than <BR/><BR/>>>a rapidly growing economy and loose labour laws, resulting in the rapid creation of new and better job opportunities<<<BR/><BR/>For one thing, there is always the "I'm All Right Jack" tendency of those who have to make damn sure those who haven't are as far as possible excluded from the better opportunities and what are perceived to be the good things of life, the "positional" and "aspirational" goods rather than absolute wealth. <BR/><BR/>Inequalities of income and wealth tend to become self-reinforcing, just as totally unregulated markets tend to descend into cartels. Those who benefit hang on to their benefits, those who don't feel frustrated and excluded - as often they actually are.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com