May each of you live lives of immersion. They won't necessarily be easy lives. But in the end, it is all that will sustain us.
Jacqueline NovogratzRead
The poor don't live in functional market economies as the rest of us do, but in political economies where corruption and broken systems extend from local government to moneylenders.
Interpretation
The poor are affected by corrupt political systems rather than functioning market economies.
This quote by Jacqueline Novogratz highlights the stark contrast between the lives of the poor and those of the economically privileged. While some people operate within systems that promote fair market practices, many poor individuals find themselves trapped in political economies characterized by corruption and inefficiency, where local governments and financial systems exploit rather than empower them.
In practice
In a speech addressing socioeconomic disparities, this quote could emphasize the importance of addressing corruption in economic systems.
May each of you live lives of immersion. They won't necessarily be easy lives. But in the end, it is all that will sustain us.
When people gain income, they gain choice, and that is fundamental to dignity.
I've been working on issues of poverty for more than 20 years, and so it's ironic that the problem that and question that I most grapple with is how you actually define poverty. What does it mean?
Each of us can work to change a small portion of events. And it's in the total of all those acts that the history of this generation will be written.
Don't let people tell you to do it this way. You are on the verge of figuring out hybrid models -- with companies and nonprofits, markets, government, crowd-sourced philanthropy. The capitalist system as we know it is not working.
Traditional charity and aid are never going to solve the problems of poverty.
A clear lesson of history is that a 'sine qua non' for sustained economic recovery following a financial crisis is a thoroughgoing repair of the financial system.
All systems are capitalist. It's just a matter of who owns and controls the capital -- ancient king, dictator, or private individual. We should properly be looking at the contrast between a free market system where individuals have the right to live like kings if they have the ability to earn that right and government control of the market system such as we find today in socialist nations.
The strongest argument for free enterprise is that it prevents anybody from having too much power. Whether that person is a government official, a trade union official, or a business executive. If forces them to put up or shut up. They either have to deliver the goods, produce something that people are willing to pay for, are willing to buy, or else they have to go into a different business.
Over the years, the U.S. economy has shown a remarkable ability to absorb shocks of all kinds, to recover, and to continue to grow. Flexible and efficient markets for labor and capital, an entrepreneurial tradition, and a general willingness to tolerate and even embrace technological and economic change all contribute to this resiliency.
Those on the downside of rising economic inequality generally do not want government policies that look like handouts. They typically do not want the government to make the tax system more progressive, to impose punishing taxes on the rich, in order to give the money to them. Redistribution feels demeaning. It feels like being labeled a failure.
It's one thing to recognize that the gap between the rich and everybody else is growing like a cancer; it's another thing to come up with useful solutions.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.