Homogeneous middles vs. heterogeneous tails, and the end of the ‘Inverted-U’: the share of the rich is what it’s all about

This paper examines the current global scene of distributional disparities within-nations. There are six main conclusions. First, about 80 per cent of the world’s population now live in regions whose median country has a Gini not far from 40. Second, as outliers are now only located among middle-income and rich countries, the ‘upwards’ side of the ‘Inverted-U’ between inequality and income per capita has evaporated (and with it the statistical support there was for the hypothesis that posits that, for whatever reason, ‘things have to get worse before they can get better’). Third, among middle-income countries Latin America and mineral-rich Southern Africa are uniquely unequal, while Eastern Europe follows a distributional path similar to the Nordic countries. Fourth, among rich countries there is a large (and growing) distributional diversity. Fifth, within a global trend of rising inequality, there are two opposite forces at work. One is ‘centrifugal’, and leads to an increased diversity in the shares appropriated by the top 10 and bottom 40 per cent. The other is ‘centripetal’, and leads to a growing uniformity in the income-share appropriated by deciles 5 to 9. Therefore, half of the world’s population (the middle and upper-middle classes) have acquired strong ‘property rights’ over half of their respective national incomes; the other half, however, is increasingly up for grabs between the very rich and the poor. And sixth, Globalisation is thus creating a distributional scenario in which what really matters is the income-share of the rich — because the rest ‘follows’ (middle classes able to defend their shares, and workers with ever more precarious jobs in ever more ‘flexible’ labour markets). Therefore, anybody attempting to understand the within-nations disparity of inequality should always be reminded of this basic distributional fact following the example of Clinton’s campaign strategist: by sticking a note on their notice-boards saying “It’s the share of the rich, stupid”.

The revenge of the market on the rentiers why neo-liberal reports of the end of history turned out to be premature

Starting from the perspective of heterodox Keynesian-Minskyian-Kindlebergian financial economics, this paper begins by highlighting a number of mechanisms that contributed to the current financial crisis. These include excess liquidity, income polarisation, conflicts between financial and productive capital, lack of intelligent regulation, asymmetric information, principal-agent dilemmas and bounded rationalities. However, the paper then proceeds to argue that perhaps more than ever the ‘macroeconomics’ that led to this crisis only makes analytical sense if examined within the framework of the political settlements and distributional outcomes in which it had operated. Taking the perspective of critical social theories the paper concludes that, ultimately, the current financial crisis is the outcome of something much more systemic, namely an attempt to use neo-liberalism (or, in US terms, neo-conservatism) as a new technology of power to help transform capitalism into a rentiers’ delight. And in particular, into a system without much ‘compulsion’ on big business; i.e., one that imposes only minimal pressures on big agents to engage in competitive struggles in the real economy (while inflicting exactly the opposite fate on workers and small firms). A key component in the effectiveness of this new technology of power was its ability to transform the state into a major facilitator of the ever-increasing rent-seeking practices of oligopolistic capital. The architects of this experiment include some capitalist groups (in particular rentiers from the financial sector as well as capitalists from the ‘mature’ and most polluting industries of the preceding techno-economic paradigm), some political groups, as well as intellectual networks with their allies – including most economists and the ‘new’ left. Although rentiers did succeed in their attempt to get rid of practically all fetters on their greed, in the end the crisis materialised when ‘markets’ took their inevitable revenge on the rentiers by calling their (blatant) bluff.

As pinturas de Waldomiro de Deus: signos e desejos a favor da educação na escola de ensino fundamental

O objetivo deste trabalho é propor um projeto com o intuito de levar o aluno de ensino fundamental da rede pública ao conhecimento e à reflexão acerca de um determinado período social e político da historia brasileira, conhecido como a ditadura militar da década de 1960, através da obra do artista popular Waldomiro de Deus. Para tanto, propõe-se a utilização da Abordagem Triangular (AT) para o ensino da arte, que consiste em uma metodologia baseada em três eixos principais: a contextualização da obra, a sua apreciação e a prática. A contextualização da obra de arte no projeto é para o aluno entender a época na qual foi criada, e estabelecer as relações sociais e culturais de forma integrada. A apreciação da obra é a leitura crítica das imagens, que ajudará ao aluno a formar seus próprios conceitos sobre os trabalhos artísticos a partir daí analisados. A prática refere-se ao trabalho no ateliê, a criação visual, a utilização dos materiais para composição dos trabalhos. Estes trabalhos serão elaborados a partir do estudo da obra do artista, não sendo uma cópia, e o aluno terá a liberdade para se expressar dentro de sua realidade. Este projeto pretende trazer para os seus beneficiários a discussão da arte e o seu papel no ensino fundamental. Compartilhar com as crianças um cotidiano educativo proposto por este projeto é envolver linguagens artísticas diferentes, como prática de dinâmicas entre professores e alunos, no processo de desenvolvimento e criação da arte e na apropriação de valores éticos. Espera-se ao final do projeto que os alunos conheçam a obra do artista Waldomiro de Deus, a temática que envolveu e a sua importância para o conhecimento desse período histórico do país.