Toma nota.../Take note...

Según el ex presidente Obama, la elevada desigualdad en el nivel de ingresos entre los sectores más pobres y más ricos de la sociedad es un mal pernicioso porque "una mayor desigualdad se asocia con una menor movilidad entre generaciones". Como resultado, "[una] desigualdad peligrosa y creciente y la falta de movilidad ascendente ... ha puesto en peligro el trato básico de la clase media en Estados Unidos: que si trabajas duro, tienes la oportunidad de salir adelante". Esta y otras afirmaciones semejantes se han propagado y se siguen divulgando en los medios académicos, el ambiente político y hasta en algunos centros de investigación económica y financiera como los de la OCDE y la CEPAL. Esto da lugar a que se impulsen políticas para que el gobierno redistribuya la riqueza; en otras palabras, para que el alegado exceso de riqueza que cae en manos de los ricos se entregue a los pobres. Un estudio reciente de un grupo de economistas de Harvard dirigido por Raj Chetty contradice directamente la afirmación del  ex presidente de que una mayor desigualdad de ingresos obstaculiza la movilidad económica. “La participación del 1% superior [de la riqueza] no está correlacionada con la movilidad relativa”, escribe Chetty. Al revisar el trabajo de sus colegas, el economista Lawrence F. Katz admite que, a pesar del aumento de la desigualdad, "no es cierto que la movilidad en sí sea cada vez menor". De hecho, descubrieron que los niños de hoy tienen la misma probabilidad de pasar a un nivel de ingresos más alto que hace 50 años.

Mark W. Hendrickson, un destacado economista especializado en políticas sociales, nos ofrece (en inglés) un breve, pero profundo análisis sobre este tema.

More Mischief About Income Inequality

In September, the renowned RAND Corporation released a meticulously detailed, scrupulously objective study about income inequality in the United States: “Trends in Income From 1975 to 2018.” The authors of the study, Carter C. Price and Kathryn A. Edwards, adhered to the highest standards of scholarly integrity.

The study opens with the statement, “The three decades following the Second World War saw a period of economic growth that was shared across the income distribution, but inequality in taxable income has increased substantially over the last four decades.”

Thirty years after reunification, Germany is shouldering more responsibility. But it has a lot more to do.

German Unity Day is the National Day in Germany, celebrated on 3 October as a public holiday. It commemorates the German reunification (German: Deutsche Wiedervereinigung) in 1990 when the the German Democratic Republic (GDR, colloquially East Germany; German: Deutsche Demokratische Republik, DDR) became part of the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG, colloquially West Germany; German: Bundesrepublik Deutschland, BRD) to form the reunited nation of Germany, as provided by the original Article 23 of the federal Constitution (Grundgesetz). Berlin was reunited into a single city, and again became the capital of united Germany.

Today exactly one month ago Germany celebrated the 30th anniversary of its reunification.

Berlin, Nov. 3.– Margaret Thatcher feared and openly opposed the reunification of East and West Germany. François Mitterrand was said to have shared her worries, though he accepted it was inevitable. Giulio Andreotti repeated a popular quip: that he loved Germany so much, he “preferred it when there were two of them”. Yet despite the reservations of the British, French and Italian leaders in 1990, a new country came into being 30 years ago on October 3rd. With 80m people, it was immediately the most populous country and mightiest economy in a Europe that until then had had four roughly equal principals. Ever since, statesmen and scholars have grappled with the problem of how to deal with the reluctant hegemon at the heart of Europe. How should Germany lead without dominating? Indeed, after the enormities of Nazism, can it be trusted to lead at all?

Thirty years on, German reunification has been a resounding success. East Germans were freed from the dull yoke of communism. With just three chancellors in three decades, the new, liberated Germany has been steady and pragmatic. It has championed the expansion of the European Union to the east and the creation of the €uro.

See Main Points of the Democratic Party Platform 2020 HERE

The Republican National Committee adopted a resolution regarding the platform on August 22, 2020, that reiterated that the party would not adopt a new platform because "it did not want a small contingent of delegates formulating a new platform without the breadth of perspectives within the ever-growing Republican movement." The resolution also noted the party's continued support for Trump's America First agenda.

The text of the resolution adopted by the Republican National Committee on August 22, 2020, regarding the party's platform is available HERE 

Next day (August 23, 2020), President Trump released the following list of core priorities for his second-term agenda. 

JOBS

• Create 10 Million New Jobs in 10 Months
• Create 1 Million New Small Businesses
• Cut Taxes to Boost Take-Home Pay and Keep Jobs in America
• Enact Fair Trade Deals that Protect American Jobs
• 'Made in America' Tax Credits
• Expand Opportunity Zones
• Continue Deregulatory Agenda for Energy Independence

ERADICATE COVID-19

• Develop a Vaccine by The End Of 2020
• Return to Normal in 2021
• Make All Critical Medicines and Supplies for Healthcare Workers in The United States
• Refill Stockpiles and Prepare for Future Pandemics

END OUR RELIANCE ON CHINA

Although Jerusalen is the capital of Israel and the whole city and its suburbs are under its sovereignty, the Israeli government's discretion to extend freedom of religion to Muslims and Christians, who retain authority over sacred places and temples, is remarkable. Israel signed a peace treaty with Egypt on 26 March 1979 and another one with Jordan on 26 October 1994. This year, two more Muslim states recognized Israel and signed peace treaties with the Jewish State: the United Arab Emirates and Bahrein. It is known that other Muslim states are considering to follow this trend towards peace in the region if President Trump wins the elections this November. If not, they will delay that decision until they verify the political orientation of the new President, or even back down from it.

Is it time to ‘normalize’ the Temple Mount?  

Normalization is the buzzword of the moment. We are now normalizing things that had been abnormal for far too long.

Jerusalem, Oct. 25.– It is no coincidence that the deal to normalize relations between the State of Israel and the United Arab Emirates is called the “Abraham Accords.” The patriarch, common to both Judaism and Islam, is revered by both as the progenitor of both religions and peoples.

Both Jews and Muslims believe that Abraham was told to sacrifice his son, while commentators differ on the identity of the son. Jews of course believe that the binding of Isaac was a scene set on the Temple Mount that earlier was the point of creation and later became the location for the two greatest houses of worship for the Jewish nation.