今回は、資本主義と格差の問題です。SILSでは、今回のThomas
PikettyやJeffrey D.
Sachs（添付したExtra MaterialのReferenceの引用文の筆者）のような、新しい経済・社会体制構築のための提案をする学者の文章を使った問題が出題されています。これは、現在、資本主義という経済体制の問題点が様々な形で噴出してきており（例: 大国の資源独占と暴力に対抗する海賊・テロや、温暖化、環境破壊によるパンデミック等）極端な格差が倫理的に問題であるだけでなく、温暖化による気候変動を乗り切るために避けて通れない課題になっていることと関係があると思われます。マイケル・ムーア監督が教皇フランシスコに会った際、”Is
capitalism a sin?”と尋ねると教皇は “Si.”「はい。」と即答したという逸話があります。ヨーロッパでは病院や大学が無料の国が多数あります。アメリカのような、国民の大多数が貯金もなくその日暮らしである一方で、働かなくても豪奢な生活をしている１％の超富裕層が政治・経済を支配している社会から、全ての人にやさしい経済・社会への移行が始まっているのです。アメリカでも、バイデン大統領になってから、最低賃金15ドルや学生ローンの帳消しといった格差是正政策が実施されています。これらの点を確認したのち、解き直してみて下さい。
各段落の要旨
第１段落 マルクスの「資本論」と違いﾋﾟｹﾃｨの「21世紀の資本論」は 短期間でベストセラーになった。
第2段落 タイミングが良かったのでこの本は売れた。アメリカでは近年格差拡大が注目されているのでこの本の主張（資本主義は富の蓄積を招くので世界的に富に課税すべき）が左翼に注目された。
第3段落 しかし現実的ではない。
第4段落 この本の３つの大きな貢献のひとつめは、1914年から1970年代は格差が狭まった例外的な期間であり、70年代以降は19世紀レベルまで格差が拡大していることを、税統計により示したことである。
第5段落 二つ目の貢献は、資本論により格差拡大傾向を説明し、将来を予測した点だ。ﾋﾟｹﾃｨによれば、経済成長率よりも資産を元手に投資した時の利益の方が常に大きいので、自由市場は富の蓄積を増大させる。二つの大戦や恐慌は資産投資の利益を減少させたが、そのような例外的要因がなければ、そして特に成長率の低い高齢化社会では資産による大きな利益は富の蓄積を招く。しかしこの予測は問題だ。
第6段落 ﾋﾟｹﾃｨの予測は本質的な資本理論ではなく過去のデータに基づいた仮説に過ぎない。富が蓄積されても資産による利益は下がらないと想定している。
第7段落 ３つめの貢献は、富の集中は避けられないだけでなく最大の問題だとし、資本への累進課税と50万ドル以上の年収には80％の税率を提案したことだがこれは問題だ。
第8段落 この提案（世界的な自由経済で蓄積する富への大きな課税による富の再分配）は左翼寄りで信頼性を失わせる。富の集中が問題であるということを説明するというよりも主張しているのであり、富の再分配の他の方法もほぼ無視している。収入と資産への高い税率は起業家や冒険の意欲を無くさせるし、相続税など他の再分配の方法もある。
第9段落 ﾋﾟｹﾃｨが富裕層を罰することに集中しているのは社会主義のイデオロギーのように聞こえ、従ってベストセラーにはなるが、行動指針としてはお粗末である。
問１ 別紙参照。
問２ ﾋﾟｹﾃｨの本の3つの貢献のひとつを選び、自分の言葉を使い英語で要約し、エコノミスト紙はその貢献を支持していると思うかどうかを説明してください。解答欄の所定箇所を使ってください。
考え方 問後半「エコノミスト紙はその貢献を支持していると思うかどうか」の判断は本文の表現を根拠にする。
本文該当箇所 主題本文該当箇所と第4段落以降の要旨および別紙参照
問３ 資本主義社会における富の集中は重大問題だと考えますか？必ず少なくとも2点の主張を自分自身の言葉でするようにしてください。解答欄の所定箇所に英語で書いてください。
考え方 Yesの場合 テキストの内容を基に解答することもできるし、自分の知識を基に応えることもできる。
1)【テキストの内容を基に解答する場合の例】 ●筆者はﾋﾟｹﾃｨの格差拡大が大問題であるという前提に説明がないことは問題だとしている（第8段落始め）が、格差拡大の問題性自体については明確に否定してはいない。 ●「21世紀の資本論」にある、そして筆者が取り上げている「現在格差が20世紀以前の状態（レ・ミゼラブルやクリスマス・キャロルの時代背景に近い）になりつつある」という事実から極端な格差社会の再来（王侯貴族対農奴の格差社会の現代版）につながる可能性が推測できるので重大だと考えられる。（格差拡大が進むかどうかについて、筆者はこの予測が過去のデータに基づいたものに過ぎないとしており、この点についてはﾋﾟｹﾃｨ自身も資本論の冒頭で将来予測不可能な要因（技術革新など）により彼の予測が外れる可能性は指摘している。しかし過去の予測に基づいた将来の予測は一般的な科学的推論であり、地球温暖化も少子高齢化も過去のデータに基づいた将来の予測で今のところ予測通りの結果が出ているし経済動向予測は通常過去のデータに基づいている。例えばブルームバーグや帝国データバンクはそのためのサービス（企業株価動向分析ソフト・経済情報提供サービス）を提供している。さらに富の蓄積は人口増加が減速し（更に高齢化が進み）生産性が上がらない時に進むと考えられる(第5段落最後)が、これらすべては今の傾向で今後も続くことが予測されている。）●筆者の言う累進課税以外の富の再分配手段については様々な法の抜け穴による税逃れがあるためこれまで有効ではなかった。
2)【自分の知識を基に解答する場合の例】●極端な富の蓄積は社会に悪い影響を与える。尊厳ある生活ができない人が多くなる。金融恐慌・環境破壊・弱者の犠牲などの結果を生む ●富の蓄積は金権政治に繋がり、民衆の福利を犠牲にして拡大し、民主主義を無効にする ●中流すなわち大半の労働力を破壊して消費意欲を減少させ病気や犯罪等の社会問題を増加させるので社会全体が不健全になる。
Noの場合 1) 【本文を基に解答する場合】 ●経済成長により景気が良くなれば問題ない。富の蓄積より経済成長率が高ければ人々の暮らし向きは良くなるので富の蓄積は問題にならない。●技術革新と法整備が徐々に格差を解消する。筆者はﾋﾟｹﾃｨの予測が外れる可能性があるとしているし、グローバル資産課税以外の富の再分配方法があると言っている。今まで大発明・発見により皆の暮らし向きは良くなってきたし、現在では社会保障制度や選挙権もある。最低賃金引き上げが行われたり、米証券取引所が最高経営責任者と社員（メディアン）の賃金格差の公開を大手企業に求めたりと徐々に格差是正は進んでいる。【自分の知識を基に解答する場合】 ●富裕層がしっかりしていれば共産主義（政府が経済の大半を管理し、自由を制限する）よりましだ。《反論下記参照》
Yes, the concentration of wealth in capitalist societies is a
significant problem.
1) ●The writer, even though he criticizes
that Piketty does not explain why the concentration of wealth is problematic,
does not clearly deny the significance of wealth concentration itself. Thus, it
could be inferred that it is a significant problem. ●As Capitalism
of the 21st Century says and this article repeats it, the rich has amassed
most of the resources except for during wars and Depression and that the level
of the inequality is going back to that of the 19th century, which
is close to the times of Les Misérables in France and A Christmas Carol in England. This trend
may lead to the modern version of the feudalistic society, where income slaves,
most of us, are exploited by the super-rich, multibillionaires. (The writer discredits
Piketty’s prediction, pointing out that it is only based on the past data, not
a theory, and Piketty himself points out at the beginning of Capitalism of the 21st Century the
possibility that some unpredictable factors like war or technological
breakthrough will change the trend. However, predicting the future based on
past data is a common scientific practice of reasoning. Global warming and aging
society with lower birth rates have been induced from the past data and proved
right. Also, economic forecasting is usually done using past data. Companies
like Bloomberg and Teikoku Databank provide services for it. In addition, wealth
gap widens when economic growth slows down due to low population growth,
combined with aging, and low productivity. All of them have been going on and
are expected to go on.) ●The means of
redistribution other than progressive tax the writer mentions have loopholes
and have not worked well.
2) The concentration
of resources in capitalist society negatively influence society. It produces
people who cannot live in dignity. It causes devastating financial meltdowns,
harms the environment, and victimizes the weak. ●Accumulation of
wealth leads to plutocracy, which will destroy democracy at the expense of the
well-being of the public. ●Huge income gap will lower the overall well-being
of the society because it destroys the middleclass, and this lowers consumer
confidence and increases social problems such as higher rates of diseases and
crimes.
No, the
concentration of wealth in capitalist societies is not a significant problem.
1) ●Economic growth
will improve the economic climate. As long as the economic growth rate
surpasses the rate of the return of capital, people are well-off, and the
concentration of wealth is not a big issue. ●Development of technology and that of legal systems will gradually
eliminate inequality. Technological breakthroughs have helped make everyone
better-off and we have social security laws now.
2) ●Efforts are being made to raise minimum
wages. The Securities and Exchange Commission in the US decided to require
companies to make CEO-worker pay gap open. Even though this happened after
world-wide protests against wealth concentration and applies to only large
companies, and thus they could be only an action to pacify the public anger,
the changes are happening step by step. ●If the owners of the concentrated wealth are fair, wise, and
benevolent and use the extra money for causes good for humanity, concentration
of wealth is not a significant problem. It is better than communism, whose
government controls much of its economic activities and allows little freedom.
《Counterarguments:
1) Developed countries cannot have more growth, and the growth of developing
countries are hampered by unfair trade agreements. A sustainable energy source
that can truly replace oil seems too difficult to invent. 2) Lip-service has been made, and wealth gap
has increased over the past 30 years. Authoritarianism is on the rise. Human
nature is not so good as to have a good king. See Jeff Bezos, who has
slave-driven his workers to build his wealth, paid a fortune to crush
union-organizing, and had a space trip “’cause you guys paid for all this.”》
早稲田国際教養AO Extra Material Causes of Poverty
This map is taken from a website entitled
World Map of Railways. Take a look at it and answer the following questions.
World
Map of Railways
(http://theintrepid.blogspot.com/2009/10/world-map-of-railways.html)
1. Focusing on
Africa and India, write a paragraph explaining what you can learn from this map
concerning the relationship between the development of train networks and
poverty.
2. Discuss what
aspects other than infrastructure are necessary to fight poverty.
Answer Keys
1. Focusing on Africa and India, write a
paragraph explaining what you can learn from this map concerning the
relationship between infrastructure and poverty.
I can learn from this map that whether a country has its
infrastructure in place or not is related to its poverty. Africa, the world’s poorest continent, has few railway networks
except in South Africa and countries up in the north, while India, which is now
regarded as an emerging economy, has railways which are as closely woven as
those in many developed nations such as England and Japan. This contrast
between these two countries, which share the history of colonization,
independence after WWII, and epidemic-like poverty which followed after the
independence, tells that the existence of railways can be one of the factors
that have decided their destinies. During the Green Revolution in the 1960s and
the IT revolution in the 2010, India had a transportation system that the
British had built during the colonial period. It was ready to accommodate the
needs to move materials and people quickly and in large amounts. Africa, on the
other hand, has few railways to provide necessities such as food, medicine, and
materials, and this hampers the efforts for development.
2. Discuss what aspects other than
infrastructure are necessary to fight poverty.
The key to successful fight against poverty is to assist the poor
out of the vicious cycle of subsistence by making them able to support
themselves and develop their community by themselves. To help start their
self-sustaining growth, developed countries can assist them in four areas other
than helping build their infrastructure.
1) assistance in agriculture: We must help them out of food shortage
through provision of materials, technology, and skills.
2) assistance in health care: We must help them eliminate
preventable deaths from bad healthcare conditions, providing basic healthcare,
and fight against epidemic and endemic diseases.
3) assistance in education: We must help their children receive
proper education so that they can contribute to the community.
4) assistance in reducing violence: We must support the people to
escape from violence by men, the powerful, and the police.
5) eliminate discrimination: We must get rid of discrimination based
on race, religion, or sex, which prevent people from functioning normally or
getting appropriate results for their efforts and ability.
Reference
Excerpts from Common Wealth Economics for a Crowded Planet,
Jeffrey D. Sachs (Underlined by Sasaki)
pp.227-228: Unlike the Eurasian landmass, sub-Saharan Africa is
inherently isolated by the Sahara and by the lack of rivers navigable from the
ocean to the interior. Moreover, the colonial powers did not build much
infrastructure in the interior of Africa. In India, the British raj constructed
a thorough rail network often connected to rural roads, in part to bring India’s rural cotton production to British
factories. In Africa, by contrast, rails were not built to reach villages but
rather a few diamond and gold mines. The result was not a rail network but some
disconnected rail capillaries that reached only a tiny proportion of Africa’s rural population.
pp. 229-231: The poor know what to do but are too poor to do it.
Since they can’t meet their
immediate needs (food, safe water, health care) they also can’t afford to save and invest for the future.
That is where foreign assistance comes in. A temporary boost of aid over the
course of several years, if properly invested, can lead to a permanent rise in
productivity. That boost, in turn, leads to self-sustaining growth. The logical
chain is the following:
Temporary aid→Boost of productivity→Rise of saving and investment→Sustained growth
The escape from extreme poverty requires four basic types of
investment. The first is a boost to productivity of the core livelihood,
agriculture. This is the hallowed Green Revolution that initially lifts
smallholder farmers out of subsistence. The second is health, including control
of the main killers－infection,
nutritional deficiencies, and unsafe childbirth－through the provision of preventative and curative health services.
The third is education, which ensures that households develop the requisite
skills to navigate the local global economy. The fourth is infrastructure,
essential for productivity in every sphere, including power, roads, safe water
for drinking and sanitation, phone and Internet connectivity, and port
services. The boost of farm production has very often been the deus ex machina
that triggers the long term growth process. It is also a process that often
starts with outside help, as when the United States funded the initial research
and many of the inputs (improved seeds and fertilizer) that went into India’s Green Revolution, which began in the second
half of the 1960s. In the urban areas, the initial investment will not support
agriculture but rather manufacturing or services. Perhaps the trigger to growth
will be improved roads that facilitate trade or an improved port that permits
the start of an apparel sector or a power plant that provides vital power for
factory production. Whatever the particular investment, the concept is the
same: raise productivity above subsistence in order to trigger a
self-sustaining process of economic growth.
