LOCKSTEP. (QUALIFICATION). In this post I expressed my opinion that if some poor people prosper, an increase in relative poverty among poor people should not be a concern. This article by Amartya Sen, a Nobel Prize winner in economics, points out a reason why I may be wrong. If the incomes of some poor people rise—so that they have two meals a day rather than one—they may bid food away from those who remain poor. However, the harm to the remaining poor comes because their absolute income declines and not necessarily because of any envy.
Categories
Archives
Recent Comments
- Gary Nuetzel on THE OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE STARTS ITS 32ND SEASON. (COMMENT).
- Francesca on EATING PEAS WITH A KNIFE.
- avon wilsmore on CHEATING IN CHAMPIONSHIP BRIDGE.
- Anonymous on THE LANGUAGE WEIRDNESS INDEX.
- James Friscia on THE SECOND OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE.
- Ken Babcock on THE SECOND OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE.
- Lickity Splitfingers on THE SECOND OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE.
- Ken Babcock on THE OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE STARTS ITS 32ND SEASON. (COMMENT).
- David Quemere on THE OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE STARTS ITS 32ND SEASON. (COMMENT).
- Nicholas Schaefer on THE SECOND OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE.
Meta
“Relative poverty” is a psychological concept. How can it be of no concern if people who feel left behind express their anger in non-constructive ways? Consider, for example the wave of xenophobia against Zimbabweans and other alien Africans who have moved to South Africa. The target may not be those who are better off, but those who are even more vulnerable.