Carlos Sanchez - 31/10/2010
One of the more common in the discourse of rulers "Now it is the turn to Zapatero, has to do with the design of economic policies redistributive. That is, with the implementation of strategies for political action aimed at bringing social cohesion by combating inequality. They repeat each other endlessly, and in the end, both electorally effective handle this argument, it seems that they have actually won the egalitarian discourse. The poor are becoming less poor and the rich are less rich. There is no government that does not cackle of his strong commitment to social spending.
However, as I said truth is always revolutionary Gramsci, because the truth is that for something less than a decade, something is changing in the distribution of income. But unfortunately, in the right direction. Quite the contrary. Far from narrowing, inequality again thrive. And nothing indicates that previous records are going to recover in the short to medium term.
is, as someone said, a "quiet change" that has come to truncate the process of convergence occurred in the 80's and early 90's. But contrary to popular belief, the economic crisis is not the only culprit. The increase in inequality is the result of economic policies implemented in Spain since the beginning of this century and until 2008, the latest year with figures representative. In particular, since 2001, marking a milestone in terms of social cohesion.
is not merely a theoretical or ideological arguments, the data is there, but unfortunately does not seem to attract much attention. At the start of the decade, the richest 20% had an income equivalent to five times that owned 20% poorer, but now that ratio has increased to 5.5 times in just seven years. Or in other words, the poorest 20% now owns 7.2% of income, when the dawn of the century controlled by 8.2%.
Rising inequality is a "subtle changes" that has come to truncate the process of convergence occurred in the 80's and early 90's. But the economic crisis is not the only guilty
Professor Luis Ayala, one of the sages of that country on the subject, has written that the widening of inequality has to do with job growth of low wages and high unemployment rates between the main breadwinners the home (see chart). Or even the fact that the percentage of families without any income has grown dramatically. Or that the number of households with all their assets in unemployment has soared. In particular, according to the EPA for the third quarter, 1.3 million households have all their assets out of work. While 630,600 households have no formal income, forcing them to live on charity or in the economy. It is not clear the influence of inflation-what some call a poor tax "on inequality.
Another factor that influenced the increase in inequality has to do with tax policies that tax rates have flattened, so that the lower tax (individual tax burden has fallen in all EU countries and in Spain) reduce the state's ability to design redistributive economic policies.
Education and social cohesion
At least, the educational factor has contributed to narrowing social inequalities, but only partially. It is true that access to higher education on a massive scale has become a factor of income redistribution, but, having said that, the empirical evidence indicates that when the academic year just access to the labor market is profoundly unbalanced by lack of equal opportunities. In other words, the 'rich' are more likely than the 'poor' to find a job. Inequality, therefore, is not only an economic factor, also social. And not just a problem that affects rich and poor: the middle classes also hurt by a model that promotes fairness and social mobility.
How would the classic "all are equal, but some more than others. "Also at the time of employment. And even the State fulfills that role sometimes old balancer. Access to the public, by the depletion of systems competition or opposition - has become a mere cronyism or simple corporatism, and shows that while supply is frozen public employment continues to grow the number of public employees with internal promotions that impede free competition. A public affairs, to say a direct way, not getting the best, and that takes its toll in terms of country. It is no coincidence that countries with higher welfare in terms of income, the Nordic are both the most advanced in social cohesion and equal opportunities
Contrary to what some believe, egalitarianism is not synonymous with economic inefficiency. It is true, however, that certain pseudo progressive populist speeches and lead only to match the bottom-all equally poor and not at the top: all richer. O lead to what Stuart Mill rightly called collective mediocrity. This vision is certainly a hackneyed idea that part of a Manichean image of history and should be eradicated.
Economic freedom is not incompatible, quite the contrary, the fact that the State seeks equality of opportunity. That is the work fundamental public authorities. And not mere functions of a calm or a traffic warden.
The downward trend in social spending, slower growth of the structural performance (not just short-term related to the economic cycle) or the gap between high and low incomes, he explains, also, a phenomenon that only crisis has intensified, but the experts came looking for years. Ayala
An example that dismantles the discourse of rulers. The average pension amount in respect of per capita gross domestic product has continued to fall for at least a decade. Even the minimum pension in relation to GDP per capita is now lower than they were in the early 80's.
As Rawls argued, inequality is permissible only if there is reason to believe that the practice will work for the benefit of everyone, including disadvantaged. But only under those conditions, which entrocan directly with the English utilitarians.
these issues did not appear to worry much. The national debate is focused on minor issues that only serve to entertain politicians and media in ridiculous arguments, which ultimately translate into a country a little poorer. And not just in the economic field. Which, incidentally, is obvious.
We 
