41 of 51 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
If you weren't angry before..., November 21, 2008
This review is from: Unjust Deserts: How the Rich Are Taking Our Common Inheritance (Hardcover)
You will be angry after reading this book. Alperovitz and Daly create a convincing argument that is difficult to deny. Exhaustively researched and yet so readable, the premise is that, "all of this knowledge-the overwhelming source of all modern wealth-comes to us today through no effort of our own." So if most of what we have today is attributable to advances we inherit in common, why is this gift of our collective history not benefiting all members of society. The top 1% of US Households receives more income than the bottom 120 million. Do they deserve it? Does a CEO of a major corporation deserve compensation 431 times that of an average worker? This book could not be timelier given the current state of the economy. If you weren't already angry at the unjust income distribution in this country and the fact that such a small percentage of Americans basically wallow in wealth while the rest of cant make ends meet, you will be very angry after reading this book. This is a readable, not just for economists, guide to getting back what is rightfully ours. This book doesn't just lay out the cold hard facts but also gives solutions. I am more convinced than ever, that not only are we getting shafted, but we can also now fight back. I highly recommend Unjust Deserts to anyone who is sick and tired of economic injustice and is ready for solutions.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
28 of 35 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A major rethinking of economic justice, December 10, 2008
This review is from: Unjust Deserts: How the Rich Are Taking Our Common Inheritance (Hardcover)
I agree with the endorsement of William Galston that "you will see the world differently after you have read this book." Unjust Deserts turns the whole debate about growing inequality and "socialistic" taxation on its head by demonstrating that, in contrast to the highly individualistic way we think about and talk about economic differences, the creation of wealth in today's economy is highly socialized and only a small fraction of what we "earn" and "own," likely less than 15 percent, comes from conventional economic activities such as labor effort and employer investment. Most of it comes from productivity gains generated by accumulating knowledge, a collective asset. In a clear and logical way, they further explain what this means for how we think about distribution and inequality. Marshaling the Bible, Adam Smith, Thomas Paine, John Stuart Mill and even the young Winston Churchill to their intellectual cause, the authors argue that, in an advanced economy like ours, a much larger share of income and wealth, particularly at the top, is morally accessible to serve the needs of society--a startling turnaround of the rhetoric and reality of the last thirty years.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
13 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
YOU DON'T LEARN LESS, May 21, 2009
This review is from: Unjust Deserts: How the Rich Are Taking Our Common Inheritance (Hardcover)
The purpose of this book, as I see it, is to make the case that the vast disparity in wealth between the richest and poorest citizens is wildly disproportionate to their contributions and is therefore unjust. The case is built by
carefully documenting how technology and knowledge generally are cumulative over time, so that inventors or enterpreneurs stand on the shoulders of the entire history of their predecessors and make only a small marginal contribution to innovation. If the authors had a sense of humor, they might have entitled the book: "You Don't Learn Less".
In format, the book reads like a cross between a doctoral dissertation chapter reviewing the relevant literature and a legal brief. The authors want to convince readers of their thesis that the accumulated resources in technology , infrastructure, education, dissemination, et al are in effect a free lunch for would-be innovators. To make sure we understand this fairly obvious point, they assiduously mention almost everyone, especially Nobel Prize winners, who ever had a similar or supporting thought, not unlike a legal brief citing any previous case with a supportive or even tangential holding. I felt I was being submitted to an intellectual bludgeoning when they pretty much had me at hello.
The corollary to their main thesis is since society has produced most of the necessary conditions for innovation, society, not the innovator, should get most of the recompense. Since this is the most controversial part, I wish the authors had spent more time addressing possible objections. Their one foray into this terrain is to observe that our highest growth rate in US history was obtained with a top marginal tax rate of 91%, but the concern about curtailing incentives runs deeper and broader. This is a country where millions of poor and middle class people reliably vote for a party that blatantly favors the rich. I'm afraid "Unjust Deserts" will not dent that doleful reality.
The main value of the book is that it gathers in one slim volume all the arguments and all the opinions that support their observation about the true source and process of innovation and the implication of who should benefit. It places a firm intellectual stake in the ground for future discussions about what they call "distributive justice". The book is heavy going: you really have to put on your hip boots and wade in. But to reap a harvest, someone's got to do the plowing and plant the seeds. Personally, I feel grateful to the authors for making the effort.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
