I try to put our discussion on social inequalities in good order, listing the main positions expressed, accompanied by my criticism. I would like to point out once again that my criticisms serve to stimulate your reflection and to induce you to formulate your thoughts in a more complex way. In the comments, please indicate the thesis to which to refer (Thesis 1: I do not agree with the criticism, because …).
Thesis 1: Social inequality is wrong, and it should be eliminated.
Criticism: How? Such a thesis is not much use if the concrete way to achieve the goal is considered desirable is not indicated.
Thesis 2. Equality is not desirable, because we would all become equal.
to. Inequality is confused with diversity. Two people earning the same amount are not necessarily identical.
b. Today we live in a society that is anything but egalitarian, and yet conformity is suffocating.
Thesis 3: Social inequality is positive, but within certain limits. There shouldn’t be people who are too poor.
to. As above: how can some people be prevented from being too poor?
b. Why do a worker and a doctor have to earn such different amounts? It can be answered that the doctor has studied, the worker has not. It does not seem a valid answer to me, because 1) the doctor studied at the expense of the community, weighing on everyone economically, while the worker, while the doctor was studying, was probably already working, and paid those taxes with which he paid, among other things. other, the doctor’s studies; 2) because society needs both doctors and workers. Without workers there would not even be the physical place in which the doctor works. Just as his tools, his smock, his clothes themselves would not exist. And the medicines he prescribes would not exist.
Thesis 4: The poor are poor because they don’t get busy. The painter, says Miriam, is one who has settled down. If he got busy, he would get rich too.
to. Society also needs house painters. If all the painters worked hard to get rich, no one would do the painters anymore and we would have to paint the walls themselves, with easily imaginable results.
b. A house painter who wants to enrich has the following means at his disposal:
b1. Peddling drugs or doing something else illegal. In fact, doing dishonest things is the quickest way in Italy to get rich.
b2. Take some desperate people, especially non-EU citizens, and make them work in his place. With this method, many bricklayers in the north-east have become billionaires (millionaires, since there was the euro) with fabulous villas. Part that they are the same, incidentally, who sign petitions on Sundays to expel non-EU citizens. This is ethically questionable even in the absence of such schizophrenias.
b3. Throw yourself into politics. The last time a house painter jumped into politics, however, Hitler came out.