Define income inequality
By Jonah
Goldberg
Democrats are revving up
for a huge national "conversation" on income inequality. This is in
no small part because the Obama administration and congressional Democrats
would rather talk about anything other than Obamacare.
But it would
be unfair to say this is all a cynical effort to gain partisan advantage. For
instance, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio is certainly sincere in his desire
to take "dead aim at the Tale of Two Cities" in the Big Apple. He and
his team want to fix the distribution of income in New York by distributing it
differently.
This in
itself points to the different perspectives on the left and right when it comes
to income inequality, perspectives worth keeping in mind if you're going to try
to follow the conversation to come.
As a broad
generalization, liberals see income as a public good that is distributed, like
crayons in a kindergarten class. If so-and-so didn't get his or her fair share
of income, it's because someone or something -- government, the system --
didn't distribute income properly.
To the extent conservatives see income inequality as a problem, it is as an
indication of more concrete problems. If the poor and middle class are
falling behind the wealthy, it might be a sign of declining or stagnating wages
or lackluster job creation. In other words, liberals tend to see income
inequality as the disease, and conservatives tend to see it as a symptom.
Also, income
inequality can be a benign symptom. For instance, if everyone is getting richer,
who cares if the rich are getting richer faster? New York City's inequality,
for instance, is partly a function of the fact that it is so attractive to poor
immigrants who start at the bottom of the ladder but with the ambition to climb
it rapidly. This raises the most delicate aspect of income inequality, the
extent to which it can be driven by non-economic issues. New York
City's new public advocate, Letitia James, delivered her inaugural address
while holding hands with Dasani Coates, a 12-year-old girl who until recently
lived in a grimy homeless shelter with her parents. She was profiled in a
nearly 30,000-word New York Times series that aimed to highlight the Dickensian
nature of the city and succeeded in anointing Dasani as the living symbol of
income inequality in New York.
James held Dasani's hand
aloft for emphasis when she proclaimed, "If working people aren't getting
their fair share ... you better believe Dasani and I will stand up -- that all
of us will stand up -- and call out anyone and anything that stands in the way
of our progress!"
But she also
said something interesting about herself. James said her parents were smiling
down from heaven as they watched her swearing-in, adding that her mother and
father were "without credentials, humbled individuals more accustomed to
backbreaking work than dinner parties." Later, at a reception, she said of
her parents, "I made them proud. I just want to inspire others. That's why
I had Dasani with me."
One has to wonder whether James missed
the irony. According to liberals like James and The Times (to the extent that's
a distinction with a difference), Dasani is a victim of a system that tolerates
so much economic inequality.
Dasani is
certainly a victim, but is the system really to blame? Dasani's biological father is
utterly absent. Her mother, Chanel, a drug addict and
daughter of a drug addict, has a long criminal record and has children from
three men. It doesn't appear that she has ever had a job, and often
ignores her parental chores because she's strung out on methadone. As Kay
Hymowitz notes in a brilliant (New York) City Journal examination of Dasani's
story, The Times can't distinguish between the plight of hard-working New
Yorkers like James' late parents and people like Dasani's parents. "The
reason for this confusion is clear: In the progressive mind, there is only one
kind of poverty. It is always an impersonal force wrought by capitalism, with
no way out that doesn't involve massive government help."
The data say something else. Family
structure and the values that go into successful child rearing have a stronger
correlation with economic mobility than income inequality. America's system is
hardly flawless. But if Dasani were born to the same parents in a socialist
country, she'd still be a victim -- of bad parents.
No comments:
Post a Comment