Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Saturday January 20 2018, @10:26PM   Printer-friendly
from the eat-the-rich dept.

Donald Trump and Angela Merkel will join 2,500 world leaders, business executives and charity bosses at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland which kicks off on 23 January. High on the agenda once again will be the topic of inequality, and how to reduce the widening gap between the rich and the rest around the world.

The WEF recently warned that the global economy is at risk of another crisis, and that automation and digitalisation are likely to suppress employment and wages for most while boosting wealth at the very top.

But what ideas should the great and good gathered in the Swiss Alps be putting into action? We'd like to know what single step you think governments should prioritise in order to best address the problem of rising inequality. Below we've outlined seven proposals that are most often championed as necessary to tackle the issue – but which of them is most important to you?

  • Provide free and high quality education
  • Raise the minimum wage
  • Raise taxes on the rich
  • Fight corruption
  • Provide more social protection for the poor
  • Stop the influence of the rich on politicians
  • Provide jobs for the unemployed

https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2018/jan/19/project-davos-whats-the-single-best-way-to-close-the-worlds-wealth-gap

Do you think these ideas are enough, or are there any better ideas to close this wealth gap ? You too can participate and vote for the idea that, you think, works best.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 22 2018, @08:18PM (3 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 22 2018, @08:18PM (#626211) Journal

    The tax issue is moot here

    No, it's not. The tax issue allows such companies to buy about 50% more insurance for the same amount of money.

  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday January 22 2018, @08:34PM (2 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday January 22 2018, @08:34PM (#626222)

    The tax issue is moot here

    No, it's not. The tax issue allows such companies to buy about 50% more insurance for the same amount of money.

    I think you lost this particular game of three card monty... Individuals have methods to deduct the cost of healthcare insurance pre-tax. The tax issue is not the reason for the high rate disparity, the lack of negotiation power is the much larger component.

    One single example from 2001 - my wife's privately sourced health insurance rates tripled after our first baby delivery cost the insurance company $20K - effectively, her rate jumped up $10K per year with our existing provider, and others wouldn't even insure her due to "pre-existing condition." That's got nothing to do with taxes.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 22 2018, @08:41PM (1 child)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 22 2018, @08:41PM (#626227) Journal

      The tax issue is not the reason for the high rate disparity

      Ahem. [zanebenefits.com]

      The study found that in 2014 individual health insurance plans offered on the ACA’s exchanges are comparable to, or lower priced than, similar employer-sponsored plans. Additionally, most exchange shoppers have a wider variety of plans than the typical employer-sponsored offering.

      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday January 22 2018, @09:31PM

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday January 22 2018, @09:31PM (#626244)

        2014 individual health insurance plans

        Sorry, I'm a little out of touch since I work for a big company now - is this referring to Obamacare?

        Can't argue with the wider variety thing, any employer sponsored "choices" I have ever had in healthcare insurance have been limited to two, maybe three selections - the cheap plan, and the pay us up front in increased premiums for benefits you may or may not claim plans - which never, ever work out to the ultimate financial benefit of the insured - maybe break-even, on a high claims year.

        --
        🌻🌻 [google.com]