“the root cause of most of the ills of society is inequality, primarily economic inequality—income inequality”
While I think income inequality (or, perhaps even more so, consumption inequality) is a large problem, I don’t think it’s the root cause of most of the ills of society. I’d imagine that tribalism, selfishness, mental-health problems, and so on are larger causes. In the US, for instance, my sense is that racism is a root of more problems than is income inequality.
More specifically answering the question you asked, I’d imagine political solutions would be the most effective here, as the government plays such a large role in influencing the economic distribution, and the amount of money in politics is incredibly small compared to the effect of political outcomes. I could imagine effective organizations in this area could include think tanks searching for political solutions, firms lobbying for implementing these solutions, or organizations that work to elect politicians/parties that are more likely to appropriately address these concerns.
[I’d also note that, from a global perspective, inequality between countries may typically larger than within countries, so it would perhaps be better to focus on health and development charities such as AMF, though one could make an argument that (for instance) social problems in the US spill over into problems for the rest of the world, so focusing on inequality in the US may be more important that a naive calculation would indicate.]
I downvoted this comment because the original poster specifically asked people to accept that inequality was a major problem as the premise and work from there—the first half of your answer ignores their request and I don’t think that’s very polite.
I think it’s really bad if people feel like they can’t push back against claims they don’t agree with (especially regarding cause/intervention prioritization), and I don’t think the author of a post saying (effectively) “please don’t push back against this claim if you disagree with it” should be able to insulate claims from scrutiny. Note that the author didn’t say “if we think claim X is true, what should we do, but please let’s stay focused and not argue about claim X here” but instead “I think claim X is true—given that, what should we do?”
“Note that the author didn’t say “if we think claim X is true, what should we do, but please let’s stay focused and not argue about claim X here” but instead “I think claim X is true—given that, what should we do?”″
I think this is just pedantic—if the writer knew the “in group” way of asking you to stay on topic, you would respect their wishes, but because they’re new you refuse. I don’t think it’s welcoming or kind at all.
“the root cause of most of the ills of society is inequality, primarily economic inequality—income inequality”
While I think income inequality (or, perhaps even more so, consumption inequality) is a large problem, I don’t think it’s the root cause of most of the ills of society. I’d imagine that tribalism, selfishness, mental-health problems, and so on are larger causes. In the US, for instance, my sense is that racism is a root of more problems than is income inequality.
More specifically answering the question you asked, I’d imagine political solutions would be the most effective here, as the government plays such a large role in influencing the economic distribution, and the amount of money in politics is incredibly small compared to the effect of political outcomes. I could imagine effective organizations in this area could include think tanks searching for political solutions, firms lobbying for implementing these solutions, or organizations that work to elect politicians/parties that are more likely to appropriately address these concerns.
[I’d also note that, from a global perspective, inequality between countries may typically larger than within countries, so it would perhaps be better to focus on health and development charities such as AMF, though one could make an argument that (for instance) social problems in the US spill over into problems for the rest of the world, so focusing on inequality in the US may be more important that a naive calculation would indicate.]
I downvoted this comment because the original poster specifically asked people to accept that inequality was a major problem as the premise and work from there—the first half of your answer ignores their request and I don’t think that’s very polite.
I think it’s really bad if people feel like they can’t push back against claims they don’t agree with (especially regarding cause/intervention prioritization), and I don’t think the author of a post saying (effectively) “please don’t push back against this claim if you disagree with it” should be able to insulate claims from scrutiny. Note that the author didn’t say “if we think claim X is true, what should we do, but please let’s stay focused and not argue about claim X here” but instead “I think claim X is true—given that, what should we do?”
“Note that the author didn’t say “if we think claim X is true, what should we do, but please let’s stay focused and not argue about claim X here” but instead “I think claim X is true—given that, what should we do?”″
I think this is just pedantic—if the writer knew the “in group” way of asking you to stay on topic, you would respect their wishes, but because they’re new you refuse. I don’t think it’s welcoming or kind at all.