• Sara Rimer

    Senior Contributing Editor

    Sara Rimer

    Sara Rimer spent 26 years as a reporter at the New York Times, where she wrote about education, the death penalty, immigration, and aging in America, and was the New England bureau chief. The Times nominated her for the Pulitzer Prize. Her coverage of the death penalty was cited by the Supreme Court in its 2002 ruling outlawing the execution of developmentally disabled individuals. Profile

Comments & Discussion

Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English.

There are 3 comments on Why Money Flows Uphill

  1. An interesting study but I think Dr. Fisman might have focused more on economic opportunities (vs economic inequality) and income redistribution. There will always be economic and income inequality in America (and elsewhere) as proven throughout history. We are lucky to be living in a country that had enlightened Founders that saw the difference and structured a Constitution and laws that provided certain liberties and freedoms that enabled Americans the means for economic opportunities.

  2. “Kill everyone better than you are, then everyone will be equal. All equally dead.” T.H. White, The Book of Merlin. No one aspires to have their child have an equally bad meal as a child living on the streets of Buenos Aires. Equality is a false objective that many want to impose on others, but they won’t accept for themselves.

  3. I think we’ve run up against a weakness in testing here, though perhaps just a weakness of extremely weak testing.

    The question asked here was “Are you willing to give up your space in the lifeboat with no assurance that anybody else will be saved in your place, and given that nobody else is giving up theirs?” Unsurprisingly, not a lot of thoughtful people went for the proposition.

    The whole point of policy, as opposed to individual posing, is that it affects the whole polis. The policy question here was “Are you in favor of overall policies in which the lifeboats go to women and children first?” The phrasing of that question here was “Are you a Democrat or a Republican?” and Democrats, the egalitarian policy position, won.

    No contradiction here. Different questions got different answers.

    The wider question, for the economic profession and for the Trustees of Boston University, is whether the “academics” who couldn’t keep these differences straight shall be punished for their ignorance, carelessness, and consequent deception inflicted on the public?

    My guess is the answer will be no.

Post a comment.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *