I am inclined to answer “no,” because I’ve seen the subject pop in some discussions on economics in this Forum… on the other hand, I’ve also seen some EAs disregard matters of economic distribution as secondary—if not an obstacle to economic progress. I remember seeing this subject figure in some critiques to the movement or mentioned en passant when the subject is billionaires’ philanthropy. Anyway, I’d like to document and share here some of my impressions resulting from a 30min search on the subject.
My attention was recently drawn to the matter thanks to this survey showing a consensus in IGM Forum (from *before* the pandemic – though the results were just released this week) that inequality of income and wealth is a danger to capitalism and to democracy. It fits CORE’s survey among students on “what is the most pressing problem economists should address”. Though it is evidence of the importance of the matter, it also suggests that it’s not neglected.
CORE—the most pressing problems for economists, according to its students
Of course, inequality is particularly relevant to studying and fighting poverty—as shown in this post from GWWC’ Hazell and Holmes. However, the subject probably impacts the trajectory of our societies, as this kind of neglected GPI working paper / forum post argues that “we have instrumental reason to reduce economic inequality based on its intertemporal effects in the short, medium and the very long term” […] “because greater inequality could increase existential risk”.
Update: new IGM forum survey shows that less than 10% of the consulted economists disagree, and most of them agree, that the increasing share of income and wealth among the richest people in a number of advanced countries is: a) giving significantly more political power to the wealthy (90% - weighted by confidence);
b) having a significantly negative effect on intergenerational social mobility (79%); c) a major threat to capitalism (61%).
Is inequality neglected in EA?
I am inclined to answer “no,” because I’ve seen the subject pop in some discussions on economics in this Forum… on the other hand, I’ve also seen some EAs disregard matters of economic distribution as secondary—if not an obstacle to economic progress. I remember seeing this subject figure in some critiques to the movement or mentioned en passant when the subject is billionaires’ philanthropy. Anyway, I’d like to document and share here some of my impressions resulting from a 30min search on the subject.
My attention was recently drawn to the matter thanks to this survey showing a consensus in IGM Forum (from *before* the pandemic – though the results were just released this week) that inequality of income and wealth is a danger to capitalism and to democracy. It fits CORE’s survey among students on “what is the most pressing problem economists should address”. Though it is evidence of the importance of the matter, it also suggests that it’s not neglected.
Of course, inequality is particularly relevant to studying and fighting poverty—as shown in this post from GWWC’ Hazell and Holmes. However, the subject probably impacts the trajectory of our societies, as this kind of neglected GPI working paper / forum post argues that “we have instrumental reason to reduce economic inequality based on its intertemporal effects in the short, medium and the very long term” […] “because greater inequality could increase existential risk”.
Update: new IGM forum survey shows that less than 10% of the consulted economists disagree, and most of them agree, that the increasing share of income and wealth among the richest people in a number of advanced countries is:
a) giving significantly more political power to the wealthy (90% - weighted by confidence);
b) having a significantly negative effect on intergenerational social mobility (79%);
c) a major threat to capitalism (61%).