From a recent interview of the MIT economist (discussing this article):
Sumber https://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/
Q. You are focused on inequality amid the so-called “99 percent,” non betwixt the one pct together with the 99 percent. Why?
A. There’s a existent national fence virtually the significance together with causes of inequality. This world fence is dominated past times the give-and-take of the altitude one percent. And the altitude one pct is important, but focusing on the altitude one pct conveys the message that the game is all rigged, that if you’re non inward the elite stratum, there’s cipher to shoot for. And that’s simply non the case. The increment of science differentials amid the other 99 pct is arguably fifty-fifty to a greater extent than consequential than the ascent of the one pct for the welfare of most citizens.
Here’s a concrete agency to run into it: The profits gap betwixt the median college-educated two-income job solid unit of measurement together with the median high school-educated two-income job solid unit of measurement rose past times $28,000 betwixt 1979 together with 2012. This [shift] — which excludes the altitude one percent, since we’re focusing on medians — is 4 times equally large equally the redistribution that has taken house from the bottom 99 pct to the altitude one pct of households inward the same period.
