Workers in decent jobs view the economy as unjust if they or their children have virtually no chance of climbing to a higher rung in the socioeconomic ladder.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
The people who do not get jobs are often the most vulnerable in our society, and joblessness is a terrible plight for anyone who suffers from it.
What many economists fail to understand is that poor people are no less concerned about improving their lot and that of their children than rich people are.
Income inequality is troubling because, among other things, it means that many people in our society don't have the opportunities to advance themselves.
If, however, economic ambitions are good servants, they are bad masters.
Although everyone does benefit from lower-priced goods and services, people also care greatly about the chance to be productively employed and the quality of their work. Declining employment opportunities feel real and immediate; the rise in real incomes brought by lower prices does not.
Obviously, personal responsibility is important. But there's no evidence that people who are poor are less ambitious than anyone else. In fact, many work long hours at backbreaking jobs.
It's morally wrong, and economically self-defeating, that so much wealth flows upwards towards the richest of Americans, while millions work full time but still can't provide for their families.
Without in any way minimising the economic and psychological blow that people experience when they lose their jobs, the unemployed in affluent countries still have a safety net, in the form of social security payments, and usually free healthcare and free education for their children. They also have sanitation and safe drinking water.
I don't know of a single economist who disagrees that when you raise the minimum wage, you kill jobs for the poor.
The poor pay more, and that's one of the reasons people get trapped at the bottom of the economic ladder.