How do we solve the wealth gap?

When I was younger, there was no uncertainty in my mind that people must work for what they want, that people who don’t work must find work, that minimum salaries and handouts to the poor would mean that they would remain poor.

I am not that convinced anymore.

I believe Warren Buffet said that all people do not have the same opportunities by a long shot. A child born in a third world country simply do not have the same opportunities as a child born in a prosperous first world country.

In general, wealth refers to a collection of resources. The more resources, the wealthier the holder of the resources.

But, that definition of wealth is formulated by “haves” who possess wealth. If a “have not” must define wealth, it may relate to basic resources needed to survive. To a person who has no food, wealth is the possession of basic food items. To someone who has nothing, anything becomes wealth.

I believe a good definition of wealth is how long you can survive without your usual income. An individual who live from salary to salary, is les wealthy than a person who can lose his salary and survive financially for 6 months. A person with investments which pay him a salary from price growth or from dividends, is at the top end of the wealthy.

In English, there is not a common use of the term “richness” but in Afrikaans (for instance) there are two terms namely welvaart (wealth) and rykdom (richness). You may become rich by winning the lotto, but wealth stems from how you use your winnings. You may be poor again if you spend everything without creating wealth (investing) for yourself.

What are the questions we need to ask and answer?

Here is my line of thought:

• How do we know that people prefer to be lazy and suffer economic hardship?
• How do you measure a person’s economic value? Is it based on his economic contribution or on the economic loss if he does not contribute?
• How do we calculate what salary he should receive?
• Is it necessary to work for a basic living income or could society sponsor a person, who cannot work or earn enough, with a basic income?
• Is it possible that all people who want to work will find work that they are able to do?
• Does s a universal basic income (or handout) make people lazy?
• Does a universal basic income keep poor people poor?
• Is a universal basic income less affordable for society than providing health care and other support services to the poor?
• Why is it acceptable for society that government “hands out” free services to people who cannot afford it, but not hand out a basic income?

I use the term “universal basic income” as a term that describes a minimum income that is adequate for a family to buy what is necessary to live a healthy life. Call it what you want.

_{It seems to me the unacceptability of hand outs is based on the belief that income is the reward for work.}

Is that objectively valid or just a cultural belief?

All wars are not class wars,
all wars are economic wars.
Class is a result of economic factors,
not the other way round.
If those who have, do not share with those who don’t,
war will keep recurring.
It’s not about IQ, or laziness or exploitation,
it’s about culture and opportunity.

I am still thinking.

To be continued …