The Future of Inequality│Abhijit Banerjee(MIT, Professor of Economics)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ก.ย. 2024
- Disparities in all areas of life - income and wealth, health, education, housing, and more - are growing and squeezing the lives of the majority. Inequality and polarization is a problem in both rich and poor countries. South Korea is no exception. South Korea's income/wealth imbalance has been sharply increasing over the past decade, leading to an extreme sense of self-doubt among those without assets (especially younger generations) that this life is doomed.
The inheritance of wealth, especially as baby boomers retire in droves after amassing the greatest wealth in human history, is likely to accelerate inequality in the future. In a world where inherited wealth, rather than individual effort and ability, is the primary determinant of an individual's life, some fear that income disparity could threaten social stability in the future.
MIT Professor Abhijit Banerjee is an economist who believes in "good economics in hard times. Winner of the 2019 Nobel Prize in Economics, he is leading the global discourse on inequality. In this session, he will be in conversation with Yoonjae Whang, Professor of Economics at Seoul National University, who has used econometrics to understand the causes and solutions to some of the most pressing socio-economic issues, including optimal asset allocation, income inequality, youth poverty, and aging. The session will offer insights into inequality, including whether blindly chasing high economic growth rates is desirable and whether a universal "basic income" is appropriate for South Korean society. #inequality
#abhijit #economics
☆ WKF | www.wkforum.org...
☆ Instagram | / worldknowledgeforum
☆ TH-cam│ / wkforum
✻ World Knowledge Forum's lecture contents are copyrighted by Maekyung Media Group. Acts such as illegal downloading, re-uploading, and re-processing are prohibited.
![[abhijit Banergee & Paul Romer 2] Challenges of the global economy](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/J-gx5gAbOG0/mqdefault.jpg)
![[abhijit Banergee & Paul Romer 2] Challenges of the global economy](/img/tr.png)
Prf . Abhijit Babu from Kolkata we are proud of you
India too is a prominent example of inequality in every aspect of life, be it income disparity, societal inequality, gender inequality and many other issues and challenges....still the middle class is burdened with high taxes both with direct and indirect taxes...and they are getting simply nothing in the name of tax....
Indirect taxes I'm agreed with you, but when it comes to direct taxes, so only around top 2% white money earners taxed with, rest are black money earners, so yeah taxes are not fair in India, because a normal worker pays taxes whereas majority of MSME owners doing transactions in black and earning way higher than a worker don't. Contractors, Restaurants Owners, Small Manufacturers are significant example of that.
@@TheLearner048 so the question ❓ is being a salaried person getting a fixed income every month I am bound to pay 30 percent direct taxes while other indirect tax are different ( GST etc) and what benefits I am getting forgot about free or even subsidised education for my child not even a decent government hospital...so it's better to move abroad and pay 45 percent direct tax and get atleast bare minimum Education, health and good road infrastructure there 👍
@@abcd51849 Ofcourse moving abroad is a wise decision, If you are getting a chance to move abroad then go ahead if you're not happy in India(Isme koi anti banti national wali baat nahi h).
You missed caste inequality
@@7X-ve5ol yes absolutely 👍👍....
These levels of inequality is the root of most of the problems in country after country.
And the beginning of revolution 🚩
Absolutely: From nations to personal relationships... inequality creates conflict and violence
There is no such thing as inequalities, in poor nation it's their low per capita income. Abheejet Banerjee is a fraud
@@Godsfavouritechild_555 revolutions tend to arise from frustrated ambitions by comparatively privileged groups, not from inequality alone.
@@aaron.aaron.v.b.9448 will just take a lot of failures from the middle class, AI will do the trick.
00:05 Professor Banerjee discusses the past of inequality.
03:02 Inequality at historical highs in many countries
08:32 Inequality was claimed to be necessary for growth
11:13 Inequality does not promote growth
16:20 Inequality is not essential for sustaining growth
18:19 Inequality is increasing due to rising profits of companies.
22:38 Global agreement to ban tax havens
24:50 Discussing policy solutions for global inequality
29:38 Personal experience with poverty in childhood inspired interest in development economics
31:48 The elderly population in Korea faces significant income inequality and poverty.
36:31 Inequality may decrease as growth slows down due to demographic changes
38:49 Historical patterns of integration and prejudice
43:09 We need to keep trying and find solutions for the world.
Thankyou
@@georgethomas3597 Just compare 31.48 and 36.31. does anything make sense ? Be sure, declining demography will increase inequality: the younger will become poorer.
Thanksss.. good step
❤
Thanks
Very clear. That's the way the world has moved from 1980 onwards, following over and excessive insistance on monetization of economy as only panacea to fix agreegate economics. Besides, there is another factor, namely, the objective failures of financial institutions like the World Bank, IMF, and WTO, particularly, that enhanced the perpetuation of inequality everywhere. Prof. Dr. Banerjee has thrown a new light on social mobility issue. I'm from his city of birth and growing up neighbourhood. 🎉
@@pbghosh5305 it started before then, but we can say, after the Trilateral Commission the ownership elite became more intense about their control using monitization and debt. This sent inequality and its violence into overdrive, effecting more than the usual casualities of inequality, in America and the world
What rubbish
@@vickygautam1181 May well refer to J. Stiglitz. Be not snooty and supercillious.
The problem and solution are both in the human heart .
Understood inequality much better than ever. Also the consequences of AI on the mid-level work force. Thanks Prof. Abhijeet Banerjee.
I think now less numbers of people are starving to death due to poverty, only thing we have to make sure is that everyone should live a dignified life without facing crimes. We must have a robust system where wealthy people should not be able to annihilate natural resources. Since natural resources can not be manufactured by feeding money.
The motives of the economic game, are to an extent, divorced from natural resources. As people live their lives and pursue their goals, they are not thinking before every action taken, "is this sustainable? How does my behaviour affect the world?" and that is true of even people at the top. They are simply pursuing their goals and playing their roles in society, thinking like the social animals we are, of human things. When it comes to the wealthiest people, it is a real problem, because they can change all of our lives, via lobbying and the organizations they own, while still being ignorant (willfully, or genuinely) of the consequences.
We have a permanent growth economic model. It is no longer sustainable or stable. We need an economic model that focuses on efficiency in distribution, and stable resource preservation as a priority.
Yeah, it would be nice if all those inventions (patents) which have had National Security orders slapped on them were released. The ones where energy is in produced in abundance at negligible cost, thereby essentially making everyone in the whole world a millionaire.
That would be freedom. If you were free to pursue your desires. That's the last thing that's going to happen.
Distribution of what to whom ?
@@VonKirda@VonKirda Exactly. This is the key question civilization has been trying to answer for millennia.
The problem is not the distribution, the problem is the question of stability and competition.
The key question to be answered is, what shall the production system look like.
Do you keep factories open only as long as there is profit in doing it=Capitalism?
Do you keep factories open only as long as there exists a need for their products= Socialism/Communism?
No other options exists at this moment, but both of them are unstable.
In case of the Capitalism, the profits might fall and shift, thus, the inequality will never ever ever be solved in such system, NEVER.
In case of Socialism/Communism, the need might exist, but your goods will be always worse and more expensive, and these additional "costs" have to be covered by something, thus, you will have always lack of goods to cover all of the needs. Thereby, Inequality can be only reduced in such system!
So, the task is not to distribute better, the task is, to find eather a new model for production systems that don't have these flaws, or deal with them somehow in better way than it is or was done before.
@@VonKirda Well, goods and services. Housing, education, healthcare, essential goods, and so on. Usually that's what people mean when they talk about distribution. @moqpop we have that answer already.
@nikolaizaicev9297 The OP is on the right track: our financial systems do "rely" on infinite growth, which of course nobody is so deluded to believe it's actually feasible, leading to short-term investment strategies, hypervaluation (Tesla and others...), growth over profit (Amazon...), disregard for sustainability, and so on.
What it should look like? Well, a shift in mentality driven by shifts in policy with the goal of lowering inequality (that is to say increasing access to goods and services, distribution) and incentivizing sustainable production, deincentivizing monopolies (with actual proper enforcing for once), proper taxation (getting rid of tax havens by enforced local taxation), UBI might be an idea (less people should be working, working on the wrong thing does more harm than good), consolidating healthcare (get it as far away from the free market as it possibly can), super high taxation on real estate (buying up 500 houses to put on airbnb should incur major taxes)... and then on until we finally get rid of private property altogether. That list should be enough to get us started. Let's try it out and circle back in a year and see what it accomplished.
Oh ya, I got a novel one too: Ban advertisement. Seriously, just ban it. Wanna sell a toothbrush? There's a communal website (no profit, subsidized) where you type toothbrush and it shows all brands and how to buy one. That's the only "ad" that you can get. Consumption driven by necessity rather than overexposure. There ya go and then all those marketing people can go do something useful and we have proper platforms not subject to sponsorship.
So well explained. If governments, do not pay heed to this research and do not decide full heartedly reduce the in equality in a targeted way, the continuity of growth in equality is going to be hara kiri of human civilization. All out measures from every individual and system is required.
Finally the people who knows the subject are on TH-cam,let's hear them,not from fancy youtubers
Being an Indian citizen, I know what sir went through, I know things are better but trust me when I say the poorest of poor are struggling to meet basic needs. While bjp govt is only facilitating big company holders like Ambani and adani, the day is not far when poor people start starving to death
😢I thought you were a thinking person
@@rajanbhole1448 I am ,hope you increase your IQ and see beyond what is being broadcasted in biased media. See for yourself, judge yourself. The difference in income inequality has never been this poor. These are facts. If you choose to close your eyes , it's you who need to think!
hi bro are you punjabi
@@KAPWIING you see once you point out the problem in our system you are asked your caste religion! Have we limited ourselves just to it now?
Don't spread this fake message, We are living our Accheedin, don't say against the nation
The fact that despite being from South Korea he pronounced Banerjee correctly 😭😭
It's wonderful to hear from knowledgeable people. And theyre expected to use their talents for noble purpose and not become puppets of the wealthy masters.
It's far too easy to predict with high confidence that a discussion among economists about inequality will include *no mention* of the idea of sharing natural wealth equally.
A policy of charging fees to industries proportional to emissions, resource extraction or habitat destruction, with proceeds shared equally, would promote sustainability and end poverty. Why is this not part of the public discourse?
I understand how that would promote sustainability. How would that lead to poverty reduction though? Unless you’re suggesting the penalties collected for excessive emissions is routed into education, health and hard infrastructure. If that’s the case, it’s an assumption that governments would do that.
@@claymadness The proceeds from fees would represent the value of natural resources and services, which can be understood as belonging to all. They are made by natural processes, not human effort.
This policy would cause price increases, which would hurt the poor, *unless* fee proceeds are shared equally to all people. *Then*, the poor would come out ahead.
Most people with suits don't know what is to live in real poverty
We don’t need to share out the resources, we need to stop exhuming every resource that’s not absolutely critical for society to function. Nothing is sustainable anymore, in fact we blew past any hopes of sustainability decades ago, now we’re locked into the 6th mass extinction that’s well underway already. Very few people below the age of 40 will be dying of old age.
Our world has become a battlefield.
Kids are taught from a very young age by their families and the society that, destroying one's environment is justified when done for 'The greater good'.
Today in 2024, the condition is so gross that we are reaching tipping points in almost all ecological spheres.
Things can change only when people break the chains and become independent of the few people who pay their salaries, goodies etc. Only by becoming independent of such people can we revive mother earth 🌍
Gratitude to the channel owners for this enriching streaming. I also take this opportunity to convey my sincere respect to Professor Abhijit Banerjee for enlightening us with these deep analysis of past trajectories of inequalities in different countries and the intuitive predictions about future courses of inequalities within a short span of 25 minutes. This talk has glimmered few questions in my mind and I shall now eagerly look forward for answeres in these following issues.
Disclaimer: I am not from economics background and apologise in advance, if my thinking process is crossing subject boundaries or it is not correct:
1. Inequality is here analysed from the perspective of economic wealth, but how it is going to change if we think in terms of natural resources? Riches have far better access to natural resources but still many of these resources ( other than land and minerals) are not necessarily "owned" by them like currency. How the future inequalities are going to look when we also think in terms of biodiversity and natural resources?
2. We usually do not talk about corruption. Corruption also leads to accumulatation of wealth. Is AI with its better and hopefully more impartial accounting capabilities going to alter this scenario?
3. Is it going to bring a better balance in ecenomic world?
4. Topmost riches, NASA are now seriously thinking about multi-planatory expansion. How these neo colonization efforts are going to affect here in mother earth?
5. Social media is invading and is deeply influencing our thoughts, values, belief systems and respond-abilities at mass scale even without our knowledge or consent. Is this phenomenon going to impact the inequality dynamics?
5. I was wondering at the end of the 25 minutes, why climate change is not being discussed for once but I have learnt at the end of this video that this is covered in a separate talk and I am now eager to watch it!
Gratitude again 🎉.
Inequality is by the design and desire of our society
The Korean professor is bombarding with questions to this professor with too many issues of Korea.
@@JacquesSauniere3he's lying . Typical. Janeu .
and your professor of where mistrr? @@Q_QQ_Q
Scale is a parameter of humanity. In the '60s there were 6000 international food companies. Now there are 5. The concentration of management is more of a catastrophe than population growth. Our agility is no longer annual but generational. Btw there were no management schools in the '60s either. MBA's have basically ruined equality and ingenuity.
Prof.Banerji is simply is a great fountain of knowledge. Very very WORTHY listening him.
It is simple Sir.
Inequality is an obstinate animal.It never goes away.
It is always there irrespective of time and place.
Insightful conversation
Without defining what equality or equilibrium means, how can people effectively discuss inequality? By definition, one might suggest distributing wealth to everyone. But how is this a practically feasible solution in the real world? It’s difficult to understand how highly educated individuals at prestigious universities can earn substantial salaries for their lectures while also discussing inequality.
You don't need a crystal ball to predict inequality! Inequality will prevail forever! The very powerful people in the world will never allow equality!
Equality can only happen if all citizens of the world will unite as one! And this will never happen!
Being equal doesn't mean you and i should necessarily have same wealth, knowledge or position
It's more ethical and moral compass of wheather i can freely try to achieve what you have, with all you getting help from your ancestral wealth.
Like getting educated , I can't and shouldn't be able to go to same educational institutions if I don't have necessary qualifications.
@@mukeshagrawal, there is sort of equality during our great grandparents. A carpenter or mechanic can buy a house, have 8 kids or more, can easily feed them and send them all to school. If governments maintained this way of life, I can say there is equality.
I remember what was said before that the poor can eat what the rich are eating!
Inequality in itself is not a problem. Analytically speaking it is a good measure of bad health of the region/country or place. It is like high blood pressure, high glucose in your blood means your have bad health. Now don't treat just the symptom but create a healthy life style to overcome the issue. Easier said than done. Kudos to Abhijit.
@@butchfajardo8832
If a day come when homeless and richest person of county eat same , there are just few possible scenarios
1- Communism succeeded rather than destroying a country completely .
2- Just everyone is hellish poor.
3- The rich man is just too humble.
It just don't make sense . The very reason one make wealth is to have earthly pleasure and financial security.
And the saying that our grandfathers blah blah blah...
Let's be fair , economy don't work like that , there are carpenter who still can have 80 kids and live happily , ofcourse if they got enough resources. Industrialisation changed more than just few jobs.
@@mukeshagrawal, those scenarios didn't happen during my grandparents time and their parents. Economy? During their days, nobody taught that greed in business is good. And how many carpenters can still have 80 kids now? hahaha!
Thank you so much for providing this on a public platform like TH-cam, so insightful 👍🏻.
Basically Abhijeet Banarjee wants to tackle income inequality by:
- taxing unrealized gains (future potential profit)
- getting rid of "tax subsidies" for investment when he also generously funded through tax subsidies (he is amongst the top 1% of US academics - filthy rich)
- want to kill growth so that we all stay poorer together. BTW, Bihar, India's poorest state has a GINI index comparable to Sweden but everyone in Bihar is equally poor.
- Wants to tax use AI because it is trendy in progressive circles. He has previously made similar statements regarding older tech.
Also this guy is making political statements rather than academic ones. Wages will raise because there are less workers is pure lies, it has never worked in Japan or Korea, where wages have been stagnant. Entire Euro zone has seen wage stagnation because of ageing population. Mild Inflation drives wage growth, consumption drives investments, without either there is no positive loop of asset creation hence no wage growth.
Besides pre-1991 India was chasing income inequality rather than growth (Heck even previous Finance Ministers have admitted the same). In the name of income inequality, we had high taxes, high social spending endemic corruption (Corruption in India was way worse). It kept everyone equally poor. Also, middle class in 1970s Delhi means you were pretty rich, politically well connected and privileged. You had access to 24/7 electricity, water, police, fire and hospitals. Access to high quality schools - Kendriya Vidyalayas had the best teachers in the country but it was only available to Govt employees and academics. While the rest of population had to suffer through some of the worst conditions of poverty and corruption.
Of course, as a 70s Delhi academic, you lived in an island paradise in the middle of a sea of slums and poverty but you also lived safely behind a huge 2 storey compound wall. The guy was born in absolute privilege and we are taking advice from such a person.
The focus on growth after 1991 is what helped lift millions out of dilapidated poverty, letting folks reinvest their gain rather than taxing it, what helped make people and their communities rich. Moving away from that will be a disaster.
He wants everyone to be equality poor and dependent on governments for food, Housing and Healthcare, so that no citizen can speak against government or no basic amenities for that.
Then whats the solution. You want an India where the 95% of wealth is concentrated with two to three individuals and the rest live in extreme poverty. Maybe as a contemporary academic, you are jealous that Prof. Benerjee lived in 2 storey compound while you may have not. At least he is voicing for the poor unlike you. Since you say that he is filthy rich. But at least he is suggesting taxing the rich which im sure he would be effected as well if the rich are taxed. Inequality is a crime and steps need to be taken to bring dow the inequality. Middle class in India are being taxed like there is no tomorrow and poor are getting poorer whilr rich are getting richer in a filthy way.
@@jugdol7go to any Western nation and the tax to earning ratio will seem far greener in India
My advice to everyone is this : if you want to grow big this year especially in your finances. Be willing to make investments. Saving is great but investing puts you on a pedestal where you wouldnt have to worry about savings as you do now. With Jasmine Querida, my portolio is doing really great and im proud of the decisions i made last year.
Jasmine Querida's strategy has normalized winning trades for me and it's a huge milestone for me looking back to how it all started.
Jasmine's analyses go beyond surface-level trends. She delves into technical, fundamental, and sentiment analysis, providing a holistic view of the market.
She is all about simple technique that are highly profitable, I really admire her winning mentality.
I’m new at this, how can I reach her?
Gram with her username
In my humble view,
The title should be "The future of irrationality".
90% of the inequalities are self-inflicted due to lethargic and weak physiological nature, because of malnutrition due to adulterated food.
If the food is good.
Then country will be good.
Because "we are what we eat". A genuine organic food should be everyones birth right......
With all his brilliance there is more inequalty and poverty today.
It's like saying with all the best measurement tools, why isn't avg. human height increasing? He is an academic who help study, design how to measure inequality. He isn't the one who can tackle it. Ask your politicians and policy makers the right questions maybe.
Yes there is but their was more inequality when there were kings , after the 1800s inequality had gone down and now it's again getting up
@@NA-dx6ii asking politicians and policymakers isn't enough when global inequality is something that individuals - both in the present as well as the past - have had a hand in fostering inequality, whether it's by passing on intergenerational wealth through inheritance, spending lavishly on luxury goods that were not essential for society or by fostering "crony capitalism".
Many people are responsible for this and it's time that citizens stop playing the role of "armchair critics" and engage in active citizenry roles before pointing fingers at others.
And you have brought noble to your biamru state.
Inequality is bound to increase with the disruptions caused by increasing absorption of AI, rising protectionism and the capital intensive nature of modern capitalism.
The breaking point is when it becomes worse than one can survive and no one helps because there's "no incentive to help".
"May I have some more?"
"NO"
Excellent session, I loved brutally honest take on AI especially about Indian best minds about to be at brink of losing jobs, something that most elite professionals aren't understanding in its entirety.
All of 27 years of my life I am facing inequality in every aspect of my life. One hope to close this gap was to study hard and become something but I failed. I don't have faith in the education system anymore. I don't know where my future is heading but it will definitely be poor.
Even a layperson like me was able to identify the first 2 reasons, low tax for the rich and high executive salaries and we all know about rich people evading even the tax that is due by using loopholes. The rationale of the CEOs is that they deserve high lat , then shouldn't they bear consequences for going bankrupt and taking funds from tax layers money again ? Shouldn't they return what they took in the years of their tenure ?
More world moves towards right wing mentality, more the Inequality
What an enlightening lecture of professor Dr. Banerjee sir has delivered as an economics student i have learned a lot things thank you so much WKF for providing such a valuable content..
lot of respect and support for the team of world knowledge forum from india.
05/09/2024 Thursday 09:07AM
if your bearings are in the PAST, You are moving backwards while the future must be built with a clean slate.
Professors profess intellect of past always.
Nonsense. You can learn deeply from the past, because many problems stay the same, and fixing them is a matter of not repeating past mistakes. The world of today is caused by events of the past. This is true of individuals, and of entire societies.
I will differentiate between the material world and the world of life in this regard.
I think for any particular society in any part of the world material equality is very much necessary for social harmony and it is much more natural and logical than people and economists and intellectuals actually took care to recognise.
For example even in ancient times outside cities most part of the world had the same kind of flora and fauna, natural environment, weather in that localised natural place. And all these things existing in nature were material resources for the people living there.
Also, whether due to that similar natural environment or due to ancestral genetic similarities or something else the variety in human life and life of any other particular species inside any one such location was minimal. The result was social cohesion and much less internal social strife.
However, it was just inside the large settlements/cities where a more variety in human life was observed and those large setttlements invariably came up in regions devoid of natural sustainable capability like arid and desert lands of egypt, middle east and southern pakistan and arid lands of india.
So those places had big settlements probably due to necessities of gathering natural resources from far off places with either trade or conquest and living together to make the people sustain themselves in an inhospitable terrain.
It was alao these regions which gave up great empires , lots of conflicts and unifying religions.
It was also these places which had high inequality in material possession, had internal social strifes rather than inter community strifes and the reason lies in the unnatural man made setup of those places necessitated due to lack of natural resources.
So, to sum up:
Places with natural resources:
1. Homogeneity in local population.
2. Small settlements sustaning on naturally available materials and simple life with less innovation needed by human beings for sustainability.
3. Social cohesion within society.
4. Strifes with dissimilar societies.
5. The more resourceful the region the smaller and more cohesive the community.
Places without natural resources or with inhospitable environment
1. Large settlements and more ingenuinity and complex human created solutions to problems
2. Heterogeneous population.
3. Dissimilar distribution in resources within society, inflexible social hierarchy , in short steep inequality within society both on material level and as time progressed under same conditions even at human level too.
3. Social strifes within society, need for strongly held society through human created systems like empires, kingdoms or through ideas and religious beliefs.
4. The society within was dissimilar itself and large settlements usually were not close to each other and often separated from each other by large tracks of the first group - the small agrarian settlements. So inter settlement strifes were rare ,more crucial was oppression and exploitation of the small settlement agrarian inhabitants living close to the large settlements by the later.
5. The less resourceful or inhospitable the region the greater the need for large settlements.
*LOVE FROM INDIA*
Nope 🙅♂️
saar love from Lundia saar, street sheeter kanglu mukherjee saar
@@llaehtannandella free free Balochistan ❤️
Abhijit is solving problems, guys.
Biharis are creating problems, guys.
@@orca_ball Woo! you are so intelligent, I would recommend you to preserve your brain.
Very, very WORTHY AND INTERESTING.
It is not education that survive the world. Not strength. Not money. But only if it rains and the system is clean and the air is more pure. Only God ❤🎉.
*धनानि जीवितं चैव परार्थे प्राज्ञ उत्सृजेत् |*
*तन्निमित्तो वरं त्यागो विनाशे नियते सति ||*
A Wise And Wealthy Person Should Always Give Away His Wealth For Saving The Lives Of Needy Persons.
It Is Preferable To Spend It For This Noble Cause, Because Ultimately All Wealth Is Destined To Be Destroyed 🙏
एक बुद्धिमान और धनवान व्यक्ति को संकट ग्रस्त लोगों की प्राणरक्षा के हेतु अपने धन का सदुपयोग अवश्य करना चाहिये। इस हेतु धन का त्याग करना ही श्रेयस्कर है क्योंकि अन्ततः धन का नाश होना तो निश्चित है।
Rather say, our society should not allow people living on charity.
On-spot analysis. Hopefully there will be the necessary conclusions and consequences on the political level. Thank you for raising awareness. ❤
This professor seems to ignore that absolute poverty has largely been abolished in most Western/Northern European countries. So to say that Brazil or Indonesia are on a better trajectory is pretty one-sided. Sure the difference in inequality might be getting smaller in those countries. Yet not all households have basic goods like running water just to name one example. Also...capital flight to Singapore or Switzerland is extreme (so the richlisters' equity is not correctly accounted for. Hence a smaller gap).
Great Lecture Prof.
NATURE IS INEQUAL. GOVERNMENT MUST ENSURE THAT THERE IS EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES, NOT EQUAL OUTCOMES..
Communism never cares equal opportunity, they only care equal financial outcome. Here I mentioned equal "Financial" not academic outcome. Communists will never want an Equal Academic outcome.
But that assumes actual progress is being made on the human project which so often it’s not
Quit parroting Jordan Peterson, will you? Will you talk of lobsters next?
@@AldarinnAhahaha came here to say the same 😂
@@DaveE99 Why do you think there is no progress on the human project?? Please don't say Wars, poverty etc. We have stats to prove humanity today as a whole is much better off than before.
Mr banerjee..Diamond of India
We are proud of you,sir.🙏🙏🙏
Let s have inequality because Nature is like that. And we will never change that......
He is too much Senseless in So many Matters 🎉
Negative selection plays a big part when you start paying someone to be productive then you create a situation were other will not be productve because they are not be rewarded by the social norm but if you were to remove the incentive the productive people will stop being productive. This has been studies in dogs and other animals when given treats for performance.
Inequality is here since at least 3.000 years ago.
As an ordinary citizen and a fellow Bengalee, I pay due tribute to Prof Banerjee
But the current mainstream concept of economic growth and resulting distribution of wealth to tackle inequality is unsustainable , although the eradication of abject poverty over the last several decades is remarkable
Outside of the box I would like to draw attention of the viewers to a theological concept mentioned in Sura 43, verse 32 in the Qur’an. Here Allah/God says”Are they the ones who distribute your Lord’s bounty?We(majestic plural) are the ones who give them their share of livelihood in this world and WE HAVE RAISED SOME OF THEM ABOVE OTHERS IN RANK SO THAT SOME MAY AVAIL SERVICES FROM OTHERS….”
Based on this and many other commandments, the religion of Islam has a well developed financial and socio-economic doctrine of tackling inequality and establishing social justice without disrupting the social fabric and harmony
And it worked in practice for over a thousand years
May be it’s time to look into this
Brazil's Gini coefficient in 2022 was 52.9, making it the most unequal country in Latin America. The Gini coefficient is a measure of income inequality.
@5:56 he says in Brazil the inequality is going down.
14:33
The top 1000 people had their wealth grown extreme between 1995 and 2021.
Does he mean the thousand richest people of 1995 or the 1000 richest people of 2021? Elon Musk for example didn't appear in the 1995 list. Nor did Zuckerberg or Bezos. In capitalism there is always change. Who speaks about Carnegie and Rockefeller today? Or somehow closer to today: Nvidia versus Intel.
So one has to compare wealth increase of the richest 1000 people of 1995, not of 2021.
Very interesting talk. .... inequality to growth logic. ..!!
Very good talk! Tax the Rich!
A dynamic inequality where the individuals reinvest in the economy is a much better tradeoff.
In these times of increasing inequality and unsustainability, Mahatma Gandhi ji’s ideas of Aparigraha (non-possession), which includes conscious consumerism and sustainable living, and Atmanirbharata (self-reliance), which encompasses economic independence and resilience through self-empowerment, are more relevant than ever. Just as the seemingly impossible task of abolishing apartheid was achieved through Gandhian ideals of non-violence, rooted in self-empowerment, we can address today’s crises by embracing these timeless values.
Good discussion respect from Pakistan
The wages one gets as worker of a company goes back to the same company, when this worker becomes consumer of the product / service this same company manufactures or provide.
Thank you Dr. Banerjee. Your presentation was very insightful. Appreciate it.
Please share your thoughts in a book which can be useful for reference.
Basic flaw is your poverty definition in terms of inequality.
In tax heaven of Panama etc inequality is more, but poverty not there.
In state where I come from IT companies definitely increased inequality but poverty has drastically reduce d. If we create safe tax heaven, it attracts wealth and reduces poverty.
Cartel, Aligarchy and Mafia is responsible for poverty. Last 5 years my income has increased 3 fold but I have become poorer as health insurance costs have increased 5 folds. If you r not under corporate group insurance, your claim rate has fallen. Cartel operates it!
You are wonderfully correct if free markets and democracy is ground reality. But if cartel occupies its place..
Hence currency should be decentralized as first step, hence cartel even if it comes to power cannot control.
You need Econ 101 class.
You r wrong on lot of fronts. When photo copying machines came, it was as revoltionary as today's Ai. It created lot more jobs than it took away. Technology always has been wealth creator. You can see many such cases in the past.
Pre 1990 psu in India was a cartel, they were unproductive, yet govt has to fund them at the cost of rest of country. After PVN ended this cartel lot of jobs were created.
When R.Rajan was rbi governor. Apartment sales was actually got grounded.
But mafia which gave land as colateral, was even unable to pay interest on loans they took. They balloned up the assets value and never allowed market correction help the buyers.
Now auto market in same direction- not 2 wheeler but cars.
@@kaushikb9272
Communists like you need Econ 101.
And if you are a Bihari or Bengali you should have no rights to even come up with opinions. Your lots have killed your own states with Communism and Socialism and migrate out of the states to take jobs of others in other states. I am not even gonna talk about how slums start propping up where ever you guys go to.
Not all are born into equal opportunity. Effort through opportunity provides success as relevant thereof. The percentage of success also depends on quality of effort in one's environment as well as availability of " tools , finance and support/ guidance" that one pursues proactively or receives benevolently.
Stopping those being bribed by the big five conflicts of interest is extremely important . This is why Citizens United needs to be REPEALED !
Who produces commodities, CEO or workers?
Workers no?
CEOs are thought workers
@@BangaloreIT True,but they get how much times the general worker.CEO alway fevers capitalist profit.
@@BangaloreITyour certainly wrong mainly because the CEO's are never the thought workers rather the every CEO or founders of compaines copies the problems of common people's which includes the workers largely ( minorly the ceos and founders). Thus the thought creators are workers ultimately whereas the CEO's and founders are exploiters...
It's contradictory when all becomes much educated
Do economists solve economic problems or do they create problems?
They just help big corporations
*They like chaos & civil war, in my opinion industrialists are the real Economist & these people are just narrative builder to control poor countries*
They help bring in new ideas that are only old ideas with new labels. They are social engineers. The elites commission them to create a consensus in favor of increased exploration fecilitated by more draconian laws.
They are presstitutes
They create and solve the problem in short they play games
They are capable of solving economic problems but I feel The professional role incentives are yet again skewed against true development and towards corporate interests in aggregate
You have factor the wealth generating class and others. Wealth generators are always financially better off than the employees! You can’t call it inequality!
Abhijit Banerjee, a renowned economist and Nobel laureate, is married to Esther Duflo, who was his PhD student at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Is this ethically and morally correct?
So ?
@@litterahouse4681 I'm raising a question.
that marriage is probably the most important quality/ eligibility for his Nobel prize,
@@saby7416 How does the Nobel Prize relate to marriage? Regardless, professional and ordinary morality does not allow you to marry your PhD student. Is it going to become the new normal among the academic elite?
get a brain
Anyone can marry who ever they want
As bengalee in india or Anywhere in world they always talk more and do less. They destroyed bengal since 1947 upto today. They ruled as communists and they were distribution wealth of government collecting through taxes and their cader recd the cut money for every petty thing which was transferred to Mamta benerjee TMC so there is huge currupt and mafia raj and all kinds of voilance has become of culture of bengal. Bhadra purush as dr benerjee are people, can hurdle progress and will create confusion in whole country. USA will finished if kamla herris wins.
Equality crammed down the throat of citizens invariably takes the form of raised tax rates. When that happens, cynicism sets in and productivity drops. Taxes are meant for running the government, not for penalising the efficient for being efficient.
The learned economist says that the Reagan and Thatcher administrations reduced tax rates and that led to inequality. He also cites some study he carried out without explaining the methodology. He misses the point that the direct purpose of tax reduction is/was not to reduce inequality. It was to stimulate economic activity which it did.
Inequality per se is not bad. It gets bad only when governments start bringing in artificial measures at the outcome stage to unnecessarily level the field. Handouts have never made people richer nor reduced inequality. They have only made people feel entitled to more handouts.
If CAR becomes reality of the planet instead of RIC definitely one day complete eradication of poverty possible. Now entire world see the difference of NATO vs BELT & Road Initiative, CAR, SCO, BRICS etc., with UNO in a great transition of humanity through peace and a Piece of bread and land.
With respect, the lecture is peppered with a lot of false equivalence, reflective the speakers own political bias.
The professor should be the next president's secretary of treasury or secretary of commerce.
Increasing income gap between rich and middle causes more unemployment for poors and low educated people which in turn results in increase of illegal economic activities and human trafficking.
This is a very pessimistic view that discounts innovation. Universal income is something we can agree on, but this mindset is what holds India back
Quite informative and so thoughtfully conceived and deliberated discussion
The world 🌎 is moving slowly towards India 🇮🇳 style of democracy.. hmmmm... when the gaps between the rich and the poor is like that widely as the river Gandhi.
Your words are very enlightening Dr.Banerjee! Non-White diaspora is truly a valuable part of America!❤❤❤
Non-white? That's a rather discriminatory statement to make. Can intelligence not just be valued as such?
Am not uplifting my self but engaging myself in war of debates
lmao true
Companies investing in tax havens should have an additional duty on their products and services
Woww he is teaching in MIT😮
That's the problem of Indian economic professor. There's is problem of income inquality in Mexico. Middle class and poor Mexicans are victims of human trafficking. Some people are engaged in the profession which they don't like or doing the work just for survival of their family. If they are following the Mexico then they want most of the people as salves of rich and foreigners.
UBI could solve this issue. So people have the basic freedom to say no to something that they do not want to do. Also population control, limiting people to 2 kids only will help as UBI cannot be sustained if there is disproportionate population growth.
First excuse me if am wrong. I am a super senior citizen of bharat, having very little academic knowledge, having only informal common sense, received for last 70 years through my eyes and ears. Now let me to Express my views. I feel that
it's easy to talk and write some topic for getting so called noble price. May people congratulate you for your did. But my simple question both of you that why then communism over socialism failed through out the world, even for whome , it was made, been dissatisfied after few decades. I feel that is, because of faulty theory based on few human's baseless imagination against natural rule i.e. survivable for the fittest. Otherwise it spoils the hunger for aspirations and ambitions which are natural product of human beings. At the initial stages they (have not) been happy but gradually they become unhappy when they realize that this is a life where there's no ups and downs whch could them be able to get pleasure and sorrow as per their own efforts. I may be forced to ask to so called intellectual, first practice few years haven't lifestyle then only you to be fit to advise others what's right or wrong policy for human race. Thanks.
Thank you dear sir
Excellent insights!! 👏👏
Great to watch, before sleeping.
MIT, economist and Banerjee, ticks all the right boxes like Bill Gates ticks all the right boxes giving advice on health. If you take advice from this guy, the country will be ruined.
I am of the same mindset as you Sir but the question to be asked is if the majority have been uplifted from poverty even if it leads to inequality.
Prof Banerjee coming from a country with socio-religious inequality doesn't address caste in international forums. i irony is he comes from the dominant caste and talks about inequality in the world😅
Superior of thought and vision observation, versus survival to make both ends meet just to make a living. Despite being starvation poor or inequality one who can identify understand reasons for being poor
Very interesting discussion, lots of insights.
बैसिक रिजन इन इक्वलिटी देन..नेचुरल सौस इक्वार द मनी मैन.दिस संसार 😢😢😢❤जय हिन्द
According to Aristotle Inequality exist in nature so how it will not present in society but currently economic inequality is not only concern many kind of inequality considerable like physical ,sexsual, economical, mental money distribution only should not be inequality parameter happiness indexes maintained i mean high score should be maintained.....in all the countries..
This person suggested that India should embark on a money-printing spree, ignoring macroeconomic concerns, and distribute the money to the public during the pandemic (in 2020). However, the Indian government opted for a more measured approach, such as implementing free food schemes and providing free LPG cylinders to support its population. The RBI governor, who disregarded this suggestion, has been ranked the among the best governor globally twice in consecutive years. Moreover, Indian government has managed its debt levels and fiscal deficit effectively, while maintaining a growth rate of 7-8% even amidst global headwinds.
Not only him..many Indian economists residing in US and UK suggested distribution of money to the public, similar to the stand taken by Governments in their countries. It would have been an expensive measure during Covid for an overpopulated country like India. Thank God, our Government knew better.
@@sarmitadey3167 A year before suggesting a money-printing spree, he warned that India's government debt level would explode, resulting in a full-blown meltdown.
I quote India finance minister; Nirmala Sitaraman, "Those who are alleging that India's debt has increased to high levels are the same people who advised the govt to print money and distribute it during the pandemic. Had the government accepted their advice, we would've become the most indebted nation by now & not the fastest growing economy in the world which we're today,".
MR. ABHIJIT BANERJEE CONTRADICTED POOR INCOME OF FATHER AND MOTHER BOTH PROFESSORS' SALARY. AND REACHED HARVERD UNIVERSITY.
What is poverty..!?? I think if people has opportunities to excel in their own selected field and enjoy that job… each one is rich
Profoundly naive. If there is no market for your talents, you will remain poor. Beyond that, even if there is one, there are many activities which are not so profitable. Mining minerals, way less profitable than making computer chips from those minerals.
Anyone is expressing to another one . Variety of such expressions is inequality. We have to utilise various expressions . We have to tabulerise similar expressions. Expression is the key word which are to be applied in development.
Excellent Presentation 🌹
The thing about India is it's very similar to South Africa or South America with a tiny minority (caste in india) in power. Whatever changes have come in India in last 75 years is limited to less than 10 % of the population. A few rich with rest of native populations in extreme poverty.
Sorry you are highly mistaken, each year hundreds of millions are getting out of poverty and all other classes are moving notch higher
@@ashwinipingle8832 some sutiya are like ostrich who had buried his head inside the ground
Who told you