High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/36ea6428-460a-11e2-ae8d-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz2FuBGKZNE
Cowen is right that technology is a driver of inequality and, as countries become more unequal, there will be more jobs for those who can get the rich to buy stuff. But if the future is about manipulation, I’m not sure this is a good thing. “That’s a value-laden way of putting it”, he says. “Take your own How To Spend It: that’s marketing, is it manipulative? If it tried to manipulate me, it failed.” You’re not susceptible to a $30,000 watch, I say. “This watch cost about $60 and works just fine. Part of the thing about being an infovore is spending your money more effectively.”
I suggest that inefficient consumption is also a case for progressive taxation. Cowen is more sceptical: “To balance our budgets, taxes on the wealthy will go up. It’s a fait accompli. But you also have a lot of the wealthy who give to charity and use the internet to give far more efficiently.” Inequality is not a bad thing per se, he suggests later. “At some point we’ll arrive at a future where a lot of people have stagnant real incomes but they won’t count as poor in the contemporary sense. You will neither be correct to say that they are well-off – but they will have a lot of free stuff, not much money in the bank.”
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário