FGV 2019 – Questão 79

Linguagens / Inglês
September 10, 2018
by N.B.
Introduction
In an age of widening inequality, the Stanford professor Walter Scheidel believes he has cracked the code on how to overcome it in his book “The Great Leveler”. The Economist’s Open Future initiative asked Mr Scheidel to reply to a number of questions.
1.The Economist: Is society incapable of tackling income inequality peacefully?
Walter Scheidel: No, but history shows that there are limits. There is a big difference between maintaining existing arrangements that successfully check inequality — Scandinavia is a good example — and significantly reducing it. The latter requires real change and that is always much harder to do: think of America or Britain, not to mention Brazil, China or India. The modern welfare state does a reasonably good job of compensating for inequality before taxes and transfers. However, for more substantial levelling to occur, the established order needs to be shaken up: the greater the shock to the system, the easier it becomes to reduce privilege at the top.
2. The Economist: Are we really living in an implacable period of wealth inequality — or was the relatively equal society that followed the Second World War the real aberration?
Walter Scheidel: When we view history over the long run, we can see that this experience was certainly a novelty. We now know that modernisation as such does not reliably reduce inequality. Many things had to come together to make this happen, such as very high income
and estate taxes, strong labour unions, and intrusive regulations and controls. Since the 1980s, liberalisation
and globalisation have allowed inequality to rise again. Even so, wealth concentration in Europe is nowhere near as high as it was a century ago. Like Europe, America, meanwhile, is getting there — which shows that it all depends on where you look.
3. The Economist: How do artificial intelligence and automation fit in to your thinking? Will they be a calamity for employment and thus for equality? Or might they unleash extraordinary productivity and improvements in living standards that actually narrow inequality?
Walter Scheidel:
Ideally, we would like education to keep up with technological change to make sure workers have the skills they need to face this challenge. But in practice, there will always be losers, and even basic income schemes can take us only so far. At the end of the day, someone owns the robots. As long as the capitalist world system is in place, it is hard to see how even huge productivity gains from greater automation would benefit society evenly instead of funnelling even more income and wealth to those who are in the best position to pocket these gains.
(The Economist. http://bit.do/eysic. Adaptado
According to Walter Scheidel’s answer to the first question, in order to reduce inequality substantially, there should be
a) a peaceful approach.
b) a preservation of successful arrangements.
c) an improvement of the welfare state.
d) a tax and transfer compensation.
e) an impact to the established order.

Veja outras questões semelhantes:

Base dudow 2000 – Questão 50
Check the correct answer: “Die, my dear doctor, that’s the last thing I……………..”a) going to dob) will doc) to dod) doinge) done
FGV 2016 – Questão 12
Em uma urna, há 4 bolas vermelhas e 5 bolas brancas. Sorteando-se sucessivamente 3 bolas sem reposição, qual a probabilidade de observarmos bolas de cores diferentes? a) 4/5. b) 6/7. c) 3/4. d) 5/6. e) 2/3.
FGV Administração 2011 – Questão 27
A visão da história do Brasil como inerte e repetitiva, marcante no excerto, deve grande parte de sua força literária ao fato de o texto empregar, em sua construção, a) personificações satíricas, que concretizam visualmente as ideias. b) a enumeração caótica de elementos díspares. c) metáforas que se desdobram, constituindo alegorias. d) a reiteração de afirmações irônicas. e) a alternância dos discursos direto e indireto
FGV Economia 2010 – Questão 49
Leia as assertivas. ...
FAMERP 2022 – Questão 15
No trecho do segundo parágrafo “We then look at the composition of each food and then multiplied this number by the corresponding food profiles that we previously developed”, os termos sublinhados indicam a) causa. b) comparação. c) efeito. d) sequência. e) conclusão.