The inequality of wealth: why it matters and how to fix it | LSE Event 

Democracy is when those who make decisions on your behalf have the duty to ask for your consent first. Today's republics are actually modern oligarchies where the interest groups of the rich are arbitrated by the people, that is, you can choose from which table of the rich you will receive crumbs. The "fatigue" of democracy occurs when there is a big difference between the interests of the elected and the voters, thus people lose confidence in the way society functions. As a result, poor and desperate citizens will vote with whoever promises them a lifeline, i.e. populists or demagogues. The democratic aspect is a collateral effect in societies where the economy has a strong competitive aspect, that is, the interests of those who hold the economic power in society are divergent. Thus those whealty, and implicitly with political power in society, supervise each other so that none of them have undeserved advantages due to politics. For this reason, countries where mineral resources have an important weight in GDP are not democratic (Russia, Venezuela, etc.), because a small group of people can exploit these resources in their own interest. In poor countries (Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, etc.) the main exploited resource may even be the state budget, as they have convergent interests in benefiting, in their own interest, from this resource. It is easy to see if it is an oligarchy because in a true democracy laws would not be passed that would not be in the interest of the many. The first modern oligarchy appeared in England at the end of the 17th century. After the bourgeois revolution led by Cromwell succeeded, the interest groups of the rich were unable to agree on how to divide their political power in order not to reach the dictatorship of one. The solution was to appoint a king to be the arbiter. In republics, the people are the arbiter, but let's not confuse the possibility of choosing which group will govern you with democracy, that is, with the possibility of citizens deciding which laws to pass and which not to. The solution is modern direct democracy in which every citizen can vote, whenever he wants, over the head of the parliamentarian who represents him. He can even dismiss him if the majority of his voters consider that he does not correctly represent their interests. It's like when you have to build a house and you choose the site manager and the architect, but they don't have the duty to consult with you. The house will certainly not look the way you want it, but the way they want it, and it is more certain that you will be left with the money given and without the house. It is strange that outside of the political sphere, nowhere, in any economic or sports activity, will you find someone elected to a leadership position and who has failure after failure and is not fired after 4 years. We, the voters, must be consulted about the decisions and if they have negative effects we can dismiss them at any time, let's not wait for the soroco to be fulfilled, because we pay, not them. In any company, the management team comes up with a plan approved by the shareholders. Any change in this plan must be re-approved by the shareholders and it is normal because the shareholders pay.

Some excellent Questions and Answers ..imo

ravishing

50 pounds a week "benefit" paid to a single person existing in the UK is obviously criminally inadequate. When that single person is also expected to raise a child (disabled or not) on that same, ridiculous pittance we need to start thinking about jailing those responsible for implementing such a despicable form of institutional abuse. the tory mentality turns my stomach.

Read the book, liked it a lot as a primer. Should be widely read. However, his more unique solutions didn't grab me much. That 'universal basic capital' thing, whilst fine, is a drop in the ocean when it comes to what is needed, and even the name promises more. It's a glorified savings account, basically a short-term pension. I fear that instead of fixing the problem, you're just giving young people a grant so that we can keep the toxic housing market as is.

...throwing cash at social problems...relying on 3rd party "for profit" entities to solve is inflationary for everyone & has not worked in recent decades for targeted people... it's time to stop and do something more direct...

Extremely disappointed with this presentation. It was a wonderful session on gaslighting. So - capitalism created this inequality of wealth. And the solution is more capitalism? The ideas presented would get an 'F' in logic, but an 'A+' in gaslighting.