 So I want to take a few points here. Most of them are on policies, but then there are also a few issues on on measurement the first on policies Martin Explained that well we have to see do we have a consensus that we have to fight inequality and then well if we have this consensus how can we prevent to Inequality to increase further or how can we bring it down in those regions where it is already very high? And I think there is a consensus that of course we have to equalize opportunities So that means in particular that we have to invest in in health and in education at very early ages We heard a lot about redistribute policies social insurance And I mean we see a lot of success with this in many countries and regions But there are also challenges and Martin mentioned them. They are adverse incentive effects possibly the targeting issue Of course in the problem. How can we finance this political opposition? Maybe and I would just like to add to this post poor structural change so we had yesterday these nice sessions about industrialization and I think that's another very promising way of Reducing inequality or to prevent to increase it further if you manage to create jobs and to build up a middle-class So good quality jobs high productivity jobs And of course, there are also lots of challenges with this we discussed many of them yesterday I mean in which sectors is it with or without Smoke stacks. So how can we do that? But of course, there are also a lot of potential advantages. So less political opposition More sustainable maybe and then also targeting is less of a problem here So that's just something that I would like to put here on the agenda Then Martin mentioned Universal basic income and I'm also quite sympathetic to this idea and Martin highlighted the potential advantage of this This could be more inclusive than many of the social policy measures that we have actually in place The targeting is less of an issue Maybe better incentive effects More feasible with respect to information and also more politically acceptable and we may even add that Well, maybe we also reach financial inclusion woman empowerment. That's often also mentioned in this context now Of course because we do not have so much experience with this in developing countries We also need to be aware of the potential challenges. I mean, of course, what's often said here Well, finally, do we not take away money from the poor and we give it to everyone? What about incentive effects for these policies? How do people use this universal basic income? There's a nice study on Kenya where they show actually people do make quite good use of this But well, is this something that we can assume to happen in general? It's it's quite expensive. So Can we really finance this out of Texas progressive taxation? Is it possible to impose progressive taxation and in particular in the very poor countries? How much can we save by reducing other subsidies to the poor and so on? So I think it may well work in in some circumstances, but probably not in all What is if we have divergence between growth and inflation? So can we really make this sustainable and of course these very huge programs and this would be huge programs also potentially exposed politically a boost Good then another issue I would like to highlight is the problem with the piecemeal approaches so at the moment if you think of social policy in many countries we have very different many different interventions in place and They are well Not well aligned and in particular we have the problem that very often those things that are targeted at the very poor that they are financed by taxing the the formal sector and this of course gives rise to all sorts of Distortions, I mean this is or has been very well illustrated in the case of Mexico Santiago leave is here who showed that how this social protection targeted the poor increased Informalization and that somehow these things have to be better integrated and there's also nice review paper by Chico Ferreira and David Robalino where they show that well if you look across Latin America and and you have of course of the conditional cash transfer programs school feeding and public works and Again a lot of this is financed through the formal sector and somehow the next step here to make this more sustainable more efficient and really to bring Inequality down we should think how can we integrate these things? How can we somehow design a social security system that involves the formal and the informal sector and therefore then also Somehow shifting more people from the informal to the formal sector at the moment It seems that in some circumstances rather the opposite that we managed to do Good then a few things on on measurement issues Well, Francois just referred to demography and the high demographic growth rate that we see in Africa so I think this has also huge implications for Inequality dynamics, and I think that's something that we have to consider more I do think that well if we managed to have relatively high growth rates in Saps in Africa in the future that of course then we should also expect demography to react and these growth rates to go down but right now of course Given that Fertility varies a lot across of the income distribution It has huge implications for the dynamics of inequality too. So something again that I think we should consider more Then I'm sometimes surprised that we focus so much So little sorry on income mobility. So the tools are there It's I mean there's a huge literature about this and and still we we see a lot on Cross-sectional poverty and inequality but very little on mobility So I think that's something that we should analyze more. There's a lot of panel data available now also in in Africa and I think If we analyze that then well, we can learn more about the inequality dynamics than we do if we just focus on on cross sections Well and the last point more consideration on Wealth inequality, I think it was the first point on the list of Francois and of course Tony Shorrocks is here who has worked a lot on this So if you want to understand income inequality dynamics, I think we can't do this without looking at Wealth inequality dynamics also quite obvious from the work from to my be catty for instance We can see how wealth inequality at the end fuels income inequality So I think that's indeed a very important indicator to look at and that we should also You know look at next to the income inequality That's it. So I'm done It turned out that I am the most obedient one even more than Francois because I follow the chair and I have no slides So let's let's try to see how I Manage with with that and I want to of course thank the organizers But I also want to thank very much the three speakers for their inspiring thoughts on inequality Equality poverty and what is next and I think that they shared perfectly their time In order to maximize the number of points to be raised on the topic of the session Francois focus more of inequality Sabina more on poverty and Martin tried to Look at the relationship between the two inequality and poverty And let me go through quickly on what I grasp as key messages To take home and add a little bit on the debate on what we have seen so far So we learned from the three speakers that inequality is the greater challenge today Martin said for at least two reasons I would like to add a third reason to why inequality is the greater challenge today So for Martin the first reason is that growth in market economies tend to come with lower poverty But can be inequality increasing the second reason is that we agreed that we should fight Poverty, but there is no agreement on the fight of inequality I would add the third reason is that we all perceive that inequality has increased in all countries Even if sometimes this is not true people think that inequality has increased in their country And if we think about the recent past a lot has been done on the fight on Poverty, so we thought that the tar the first target of the Millennium Development Gold of reducing extreme poverty rates By half was met way before The time when it was to be met and more than 1 billion people have been lifted out of extreme poverty But not as lot has been done on the fight of inequality And that's what we saw from Martin's even if we don't care about inequality But we only care about poverty inequality is harmful for poverty as well so as researcher and Practitioners we should focus more on inequality Convince policymakers that inequality matters and try to have a successful fight against inequality and The aim according to Martin is not zero income inequality But the elimination of unfair inequalities due to unfair processes unfair trade Unfair opportunities Circumstances at birth, but also specific discrimination due to ethnicity gender geographic area And we would like to keep higher rewards for higher efforts. We know that people respond to incentives But then we need also to understand better what is effort and what is Circumstance and how to distinguish between the two because very often they are connected and All three speakers noted that there is a disconnection between the researchers tool and public perceptions on inequality And this fact I think is not minor and a much better effort to should be done by us the researchers to understand what people mean when they say that inequality has reason and What is around them and what drove their perception on increase inequality? And what we measure with an inequality index is a very precise Concept that can be fully captured by four properties the four axioms population Principles scale invariance anonymity and the pigwood Alton principle of transfers And we saw also yesterday from Martin's presentation But if we depart even slightly from one of them we can have very different results And I'm always very surprised to find out that what is behind inequality index What is behind for example the famous genie coefficient can be unknown also to colleagues so François suggestion is to have a dashboard of inequality indicators I fully agree but I would suggest that in this dashboard We include other indicators related to inequality even if social scientists thinks that this is not inequality One could be for example what Martin suggests at nobody left behind in it But I would also try to add something that explains perceived inequality because if we measure an inequality Which is not what people think inequality is then we are not able to understand their behavior and I think that we should keep in mind that people compare So when they evaluate inequality they look at differences they look at what is around them And they look at how they got there and how the others got there So we should try to have in this dashboard of inequality indicators More effect on the comparisons and more effect of the path that led people to Are where they are and the standing people perception. I think is an urgent matter It's hard not to think at the results of elections and of referendum in several countries including mine Italy And Martin had concrete suggestions for policy to decrease inequality Universal basic income for everybody and this reminds me of a similar recommendation made in several occasions by Tony Atkinson and Tony proposed Not really a universal basic income to given to citizens or to resident But something that is linked to participation participation in the society in various forms So if people work in paid employment in full-time education In active engagement in seeking employment in caring for children the disabled the elderly So I just if you are a good citizen if you participate in your society Then you may get this type of universal basic income and that we don't need to exclude a lot of people We just need to have a better society and we want people to participate in the society Now in answering what is next I Would fully suggest to include the digital revolution automation robotization Francois send me the notes a few days ago and He was supposed to say something on that but I think he didn't have the time It was in his thoughts that the world is changing not only because there is climate change But also because robots are coming and the technological breakthroughs are speeding up At an unprecedented pace of penetration across developed and developing countries so we should fully consider the effect of this revolution in of automation on poverty and inequality if we want also to give suggestions to policymaker and The labor market is changing the type of works is changing and technology will complement some workers That have skills and will substitute other workers So and what matters is whether the task is routine and can be automated or is non routine and still need people So work is becoming more intensive in all routine skills and labor markets are Paralyzed everywhere not only in the developed war in the developing world Not only in the industrialized world, but also in developing world like the world development report of 2016 has shown and according to this report that the probability that the child in the developing world Will find a job in an occupation as exists today is only 50 percent So there is we really need to fully consider the changes that are ahead of us and policy have to adapt quickly So I think if we want to suggest fights on inequality to policymaker We should consider that the world is changing and is changing at a very quick pace because of this digital revolution So we have also to rethink social protection schemes Social insurance schemes and we should probably de-link them to the job And this brings me back to Martin's suggestion of some sort of basic income given to everybody Independent of work and I think that probably money may come by taxing the owners of the machines. Thank you Well, that's great. Thank you and thanks to our five speakers really fantastic presentations, so we now have about 30 minutes or so actually for questions and so on from from the floor so I'm gonna start This section this second the second this section. Okay, so we start on this end Yucca Yes, thank you. I'm Yucca Pirtle Yucca Pirtle University of Helsinki at uni wider. Thank you for the great panel. I have one Question and one comment. So the question is that the how do you see the role of behavioral economics subjective well-being? for the future of measurement of poverty and inequality and Then the comment or system advertisement is that the when we think about the how to find our basic income Then we actually have a tool to examine financing It's and that's what we call tax benefit micro simulation model And that's something we have tried to also develop in the in the in the uni wider here Thank you for your interesting presentations My question is related to universal basic income of which a common critique that some of you did allude to was that it will lead to Well deem working unnecessary and people must work or hell will break loose So and that almost leads to the philosophical question of the link between someone's job and a person's feeling of purpose in modern-day society So I wonder how you respond to this critique of universal basic income and more importantly Does it fit within the context of a developing country? Thank you. There were two great present three great presentations But there are two types of inequality, which were not mentioned One is going back to Ricardo the share of profits the share of factors And I think this is absolutely critical underlying a lot of inequalities and changing in the world today the second is Inequality between us and future generations were not yet born and I feel that this is something that must be built into Everything we think about because we are sacrificing them for us unless we think about them So I'd like the panel to think about these two types of inequality Hello, my name is Alena to Jenna from St. Petersburg Russia I have a question like do you consider human rights are somehow influencing the inequalities worldwide? Thank you Well, that's to anybody in the panel. Thanks. I got China answer everything You be Michael's point you be I expensive this is kind of straw man here Let's just take the money that you exist is for a start Let's take the money that you currently spend on countries currently spends on some subsidies on To including non-poor people subsidies on food electricity and so on to the social protection Put all that together and ask yourself whether you'll have more impact on the greed social goals Including poverty reduction if you spend the same sum of money on a UBI and then start from that onwards and and that that's it quite important we take this to developing countries because This idea that your UBI is too expensive developing countries can't afford it is is actually wrong I think I mean I've done a lot of calculations in India where I I'm persuaded that it's a serious contender in India Given the the cost of all two of the alternatives Conchita's point about perceptions of in rising inequality. I think this is really crucial I think Most people think inequality is rising because they don't accept the scale independence axiom in other words They think about absolute differences. They don't think about relative differences I don't know that most people think that but all the surveys that are mostly of students Have said that and that's really important because then they're talking from the ground They're talking about a reality a different reality to what economists are telling them as they're happening We have to take that seriously. I Won't answer all the questions, but behavioral economics is there of course. I just touched on it UBI is the job the center of your life, obviously that's going to change clearly and not just in rich countries That's going to be a huge change going forward Francis's point well taken share of profits well Of course, but that's under as you said underlying all of this. It's not it's not absent. It's there It's just not at the headline But the second point on on us versus future generations is absolutely crucial and good point. I wish I'd mentioned that Elena on human rights. Yeah, that's that's in the story here most of the Argument ethical arguments. I talked about her about rights based not utilitarian Yes, only maybe the point by Francis on the short profit and labor. I would say that this quite recent focus on the top share of Top income shares of gross income is to some extent exactly about this and Is really taking I mean and when you look at the evolution of a time of this inequality measure Then you realize that what you have behind that is really the profit Labor income story, so it might be possible to relate it more directly But I would say that yes indeed In my dashboard, this is certainly one part which is which is present and maybe I take this opportunity to tell Conchita that Mobility was also really definitely in my in my dashboard now the problem with this kind of Approach is that you definitely don't want to have one hundred items so Maybe this is a work to be done by by the connectivity Which is what is the minimum number of Indicator that we would need in order to take into account the dimensions which we believe are really important in In inequality This is really I think something which would be input in pretty be useful Just a comment from sweat. We had a we had a conference at the Joe and I organized with Ibrahim Patel the Ministry of economic development of South Africa and he said, you know, I I I recognize that GDP is a flawed indicator But I turn around and you give me two hundred and sixty two Okay, and that's not useful to me is what he said and he then he then from his perspective Put forward seven I think it was or five or seven But the point is there will be different seven in different countries and that's an issue for us also to To take on board. Is it going to be the same ten everywhere or is it going to be country specific? Anyway On on this side. Yes, we have we have Tony here and then we'll come to you Tony Addison from wider So randomized control trials. Are we at peak our CT? Thank you Okay, Jean-Pierre Plateau from the University of Libya. So my question is reaction a bit to What Martin Ravi on say and that's in connection with something that Francois say It is the following that you're saying why should we concern about inequality? I would add that I am concerned about rising inequality Because of its impact on the political system that we are in and the social fabric And I mean the following that if you look at the rise of populism in the world and including in the advanced countries we see that the big that the basic device is in education and levels of education and Why don't we focus more even in this panel discussion about the problem of? Rising inequality in access of sufficient quality of Education a basic problem in some country of Western Europe including France Germany my own country Belgium Etc is that the average quality of Schooling is diminishing of also as mentioned in his dashboard the Indicator of Pisa But what I would like to wave is more about inequality in access to good quality of education Because we all know that when the average quality of schooling is decreasing in countries The rich can get access to good education can have mentors for their children can select a good quality education But the average is being low and these people are becoming more and more unqualified in a world where technology and skills are Requiring more quality of education So I think that we should have more focus on some critical dimension that Accuses of the rising inequality and this appears to be a very important one and I would privilege Indicators of inequality in access to good quality education. I don't know. What is your reaction about that? Yeah Hello, you can you balance in your from lap and run the University of Technology I have question more into about the methodology and about data. Do you think? Digitalization like globally can bring improvements to that because if you have like digital data and promote Digitalization for example in developing countries It would kind of help to obtain more accurate data plus it would improve like education like e-learning IE government Also adding something like digital markets for for people who can actually like use it to improve their economic situation Thank you Thank you, Ellen, but I don't quite a from the University of Ghana I'm just curious to know from the panelists to what extent do you think old-age poverty? it's contributing to Inequality and poverty generally particularly when you take Africa and the consequences of HIV and AIDS on families in many parts and the fact that when you talk about basic in Universal basic income. We're also looking at an upper-end growing poverty amongst older people and I'm curious to know the extent to which if any of you don't Old-age poverty is a critical factor in this discussion Thank you very much Since the the panelists have covered a huge amount of things, so it's difficult to find any anything to add But quite interesting yesterday in the session I had with Martin I started off with asking people in the audience How many people thought that inequality had been rising lately and we got pretty well a Martin will confirm that we got you know 90% of people in the audience Think that inequality has been increasing lately And yet the basic data certainly on the income side suggests that it's been falling and this sort of mismatch You wonder why and this was actually after Martin had just given his talk and told people that inequality was going down They still they still got up and voted to say that they thought it would be increasing And and I think part of this problem is when people and I think inequality is a crucial thing here and In some sense poverty is a side Part of that. I'm not trying to diminish the impact, but they're saying What is how can we really resolve this and I think partly it's because when people talk about inequality They focus on different things some people Think about just how how much the poorer people are falling behind That's one aspect of inequality or they focus on how much the sort of rich groups are going Drawing out ahead, but I think if you focus on different parts of that you can get a different view about what is happening to inequality A second thing is I think perhaps over time our reference group has been changing You know in the past when people would Talked about inequality. They they had perhaps a local reference group friends neighbors You know their relations and so on we then perhaps Expanded to some sort of note national idea, but I think perhaps now we we have a bigger Perspective on the group that we are comparing against and judging and that that actually may may at least be part of the explanation But the other thing that really worries me and isn't I think slightly touched upon by that the previous point being raised here is Why are we we are concerned about inequality and we can I have always really Think that wealth inequality is in somehow more fundamental than income inequality And the reason is that it's not just affecting your standard of living But it also gives you control of certain sorts of things and this is and we haven't had this discussion But I think this is when when we get down to it. We are concerned about this and Lately, let's just think about what what's been happening with inequality Well, what's the relationship between inequality and the way that it impacts on people? First of all in the media in the world It seems now that all the media you could it seems to be growing Lee Owned by rich people. I mean And I don't I I don't know anyone's done a study of this But if you did a track over time, it looks to me that more of the more of the information that people get is is coming to them Via someone who is a rich person and then you get the problem particularly in the states I think where the whole political system has been taken over by by richer groups that there's somehow it is now How many people can run for president now that aren't billionaires? I mean this this was not true in the past and is Progressively true and it's not just in in the US. It is throughout the world And then there's the also the issue of I think about Intergenerational issues the more that wealth becomes important the more it really is quite easy for this wealth to be transferred between generations and so you get this break really between So that the whole life chance is now it is being more and more. I suspect it is becoming a There's more a divergence really between Future generations and the link to the current generation and that again is part of the inequality that people are responding to So when they say that they think inequality is going up I think it's perhaps you know taking into account these sorts of things rather than just looking at the data that seemed to be pointing in the opposite direction So three things first of all if you age decompose either a dollar ninety a day or global MPI And look at the group that is 60 plus so the AG compositions in 2016 by Newhouse or the global MPI Which we did last year you find that all Poverty for people 60 plus is one third the level of children child poverty for dollar ninety a day and about one half for MPI So it's definitely lower, but not necessarily very different from adult poverty, but partly that's because these are household measures and in some cases older people live in shared households and in some cases it's older people living alone in their households where there are both issues of non-representativeness Because the surveys don't cover them and also issues that other dimensions become important the health cutoffs are different There is no WHO growth standard of BMI for people 70 plus. They lose bone density. You can't use that measure And also there's aspects of loneliness So I think there are a lot of issues and the new group on data for aging Populations I think should be very important in that regard And I would just finally also wish to say that I'm not sure all of us agree that inequality is the only priority So I think that just to put a marker on the map maybe for income poverty It's no longer a problem But if you look at the 30 sub-Saharan African countries where we looked at changes of our time 30 of them had statistically significant reductions But in 18 of them the number of poor people went up because of population growth being outpacing reduction of poverty So I think perhaps not all types of poverty are off the map in terms of requiring research attention Yes, two points First on Jean-Philippe's point about education I think we all agree with the fact that this is something which is extremely important As a matter of fact the reason why it didn't come yesterday was because I was attending an event Where the Macron the French president was presenting his Antipoverty plan and it turns out that the most important pillar is really on Education and early childhood And I think this really fits well what Jean-Philippe said, but the point is that I agree with the fact that it is not only when I referred to PISA I didn't refer to the average score of PISA and the ranking international ranking of PISA We don't care about this what we care really about is what is the kind of inequality that we have behind PISA and you have all the data in the In this data set you have all the variables that would allow you to see the way in which the result of kids depend on The family background, but more than that It's not only the cognitive part of the thing But there there is also information on the non cognitive thing which is equally important So here I believe this is central and this is the reason why I put that in my in my dashboard On Tony's point about wealth inequality, I also put wealth inequality on my dashboard And I agree with you the fact that this is Reflecting control of political control, which is extremely important not only in the US We just started with some colleagues work on Benin And this is another country where you have a billionaire who is running the country And he's running definitely the country to his advantage. So this is something really very important Intergenerational issue also important, but It is again one dimension of inequality. This does not say very much about poverty about inequality of Standards of living standards today. So this is one dimension that has to be taken into account, but it is not the only one Tony on rcts. Have we reached the peak? I mean, this is is relevant here because we without a valuation We're not going to know Works or not. Have we reached the peak? Definitely not. It's going to continue It's a really it's a bad news For our evidence-based policymaking going forward. We've got a massive distortion in my view associated with that With the popularity of randomized control trials I'm all for in favor of putting rcts on the menu for evaluation, but they shouldn't be the only thing you do I mean, they're not But the tendency to rely heavily on them and to exclude Work that doesn't use randomized assignment is a real worry And I think that's one of the attractions of wider's work program I think has been that it hasn't fallen for that temptation. It's looked at a broad set of development questions It looks at the questions and starts with the questions and then figures out what kind of methodology is appropriate Rather than starting with a particular methodology and finding what questions you can answer with it And that's a real problem going forward Intellectually, I think we've reached the peak but when you look at the number of People working on this and the number of students working on this and going forward it's going to be even bigger I won't add anything. I think For once we're covered a couple of points. I mean, yes in education hugely important I fold that under the inequality of opportunity stuff, but I didn't mention explicitly but the point about digital data I think going forward one thing we're going to be looking at clearly is Is data sets where we're large the variance bias variance trade-off that we're used to in the past this relates also to the rct story We're not going to be looking at Statistics which we rely upon largely because we think they're unbiased We're also going to be looking at statistics, which we think are reliable because of low variance That's changing already and we're seeing that in a number of areas And it's going to be important going forward The only other point I'd add on old age poverty Is particular groups. Yes, like widows And who aren't necessarily old and particularly in sub-Saharan Africa because of the age difference of marriage There are particular groups where this is a real concern Old age per se. I don't see it as quite the issue But particular groups interacting with age where I think is a big concern and the only thing I'd add to what Tony said Tony said Tony shawricks I think A lot of it the misperception the reason why 90 percent yesterday said inequality is increasing Is I think again most people think about inequality in terms of absolute differences not relative differences That's the first order thing. I think there are other aspects But that's that's clear to me now And it's not clear that we don't do that in our measurements, but it's it's there. Thank you Just also a point on rcts Raised by Tony Edison I mean, I think one risk that we have is that it somehow redirected the attention Basically to targeted policies and that we lost side a bit of more macro reforms And I think these things have to come a bit more back on the agenda in particular also, I mean Discussed industrialization. I mean, that's clearly something that we won't solve with rcts Now the second point because if it does discuss inequality and poverty I think many of these rcts would have more utility for this kind of discussion If they made more effort to work out the general equilibrium effect So not just focusing on the impacts of the direct beneficiaries, but to sort out So what does it mean for the economy as a whole? What are these spillovers? What happens if we scale up these programs? So I think if rcts can integrate more these kind of problems then again It might also be more useful for lots of the questions that we addressed here And then just a short point on the thing raised by Jean-Philippe Lataud on the quality of education I think one problem is of course that for for the very poor countries We do not have a lot of information about the quality of education We know that's a problem But most of the surveys are still quite poor I mean, we have some very special surveys where we have information But then again, we don't have the link with all the other socioeconomic information So somehow LSMS or maybe DHS would have to integrate this more To analyze this in more depth and then to work out what are the effects on inequality dynamics Thank you Hi, I'm Tan Tsangretang from July Longan University in Bangkok I would like to hear the speaker's view on the role of norms or Culture or informal mechanism in mitigating inequality For this, I mean about charity, for example Citizens in some countries just actively participate in charity donations And that could be a substitute for formal transfer from the government So I just would like to hear whether that's research work on this And how it can interact with the the formal redistribution I'm from Fudan University, China I have a very simple, I guess technical, might be important question That is when we measure global Equality, it of course consists of two components At the moment really we attach weights equally to the within-country differences And the country's difference to the global mean Is that right? Because I mean Or should we actually weight the two components differently? Because to me it seems, you know, inequality closer to one person is Probably a little bit more important than inequality far remote Thank you Two small points. One is on Tony Shorrocks Inequality is rising or not rising depending From the beginning and the last point I mean if you compare within-country inequality between 1980 and 2015 Inequality has risen a lot. There is no question about that Now if you compare what happened between 2000 and 2015 Then you have the Latin American story There are perhaps half of the African countries which also experience falling inequality A few countries in the Southeast Asia as well So if you compare the time trend you have to specify the beginning and the end of the trend And I think that the argument is the poor are getting poorer and the richer are getting richer The first to 1980 to 2015. On that there is no question Now a second point is more on policy I think that I'm not so sure I agree with Conchita about the idea of guaranteed minimum income And I think that in Italy for instance, this is one of the Main proposals of the current government. I think that what is more important is to have a guaranteed Job particularly for the people who are part of the labor force. So the same resources that you can use For providing straight transfers, I think they can be used for other things One is reducing the length of the working week I mean Keynes basically argued that in 1930 that in his famous Paper on the well-being of our grandchildren is basically that people At the end of this of last century 70 years later would have worked 15 20 hours Now that was a little bit of an overshot But people the length of the working week has fallen by 60 hours to about 35 hours At least in the west and if I'm not wrong in Germany last year And about almost half a million people started working 28 hours a week so one way to To fix the problem is to use these resources to further reduce the length of the working week. So a rationing labor and Industries against but then they will come to terms and the other way is to say Well, okay, we'll use these subsidies to reduce labor costs for instance and rather than providing straight transfer because you do create Moral answer. Thank you I Probably if I can read better what if I can read what martin said is Basic income is more for the developing countries than I totally i'm not in favor of the policies of the current government in our country, so don't Take me wrong on that and the The reforms you mentioned about the reduction in the working time They are pretty costly like the one in france that reduced an hour of the week The government obtained that just reducing the the costs for the firms on the labor, but it was really Costly so i'm not sure we can we can afford that too and my views on delinking That Delinking what you get from the job is what was more linked to the digital revolution the automation The robotization that will change the labor market So we will end up changing jobs not having always a job and I was thinking of a way to Give something to everybody delinked from that Yes, i'm coming from a country where we actually went from 40 hours a week To 35 hours a week and this was really Very because of that we had really a very difficult time It is true that as kanchita said This was only possible because there was a huge subsidy made by the government to the To the to the employers to compensate for that because of course if you have people Do you agree to have to work 35 hours paid 35? Instead of 40 hours paid 40 They will agree But if you tell them you will have 35 hours paid 40 then of course And this is what we did and Then there was a to head up. It was necessary to subsidize The firm and this was a very very difficult Period now we are now in this new steady state I think that people who are asking to come back to the 40 hours week Or have lost their case But this is to say it is not something that easy and if you look at the number of jobs Which were created because of that it is very very limited It is a few hundred thousand But it has nothing to do with the size of an employment in in france Now a point that I wanted to to mention about your your remarks andrea is about the basic income I think you're right in the sense that Again, this is the experience of developed countries And I believe that this would extend to developing countries But in developed countries where we have something like the universal basic income When this was introduced People said okay fine. We have an income to survive on If we don't have any job if we have been unemployed for three years, etc But we are not satisfied in the sense that we are still feeling excluded from the society And social exclusion is something I believe equally important as The lack of of income and So I'm not sure that this is really the the whole solution And I would tend to agree with you that creating jobs is certainly much more important than if it is possible Than simply subsidizing people who don't have a job And on Your other point about the trends in inequality in countries There is something which is Quite interesting that when you look at the increase in inequality in most European countries I'm not referring to the u.s. Which is to some extent an exception There is no trend In most european countries the only countries with a trend are sweden, danmark basically because there is a progressive Going back on redistribution in those countries. So the redistribution system is Becoming less progressive and because of that inequality is increasing in other countries What you observe that there is one point in time where there was a big increase Such as england such as united kingdom In italy the time where they stopped with Scalamobili with a centralized bargaining In in germany when they started with the arts labor market reforms In all those cases you have for four or five years an increase in inequality And then the whole curve is flattening This is a pattern that you have in many many countries now this does not mean that there will not be another Increased inequality in the coming years maybe but we are not in the same situation as in the u.s. Where you truly have a trend The The slope of which is changing over time But there is definitely a continuous trend and I think this is something important to keep to keep in mind I Think one of the interests in ubi here is also that it's a double Benefit because it addresses poverty and it addresses inequality in the same intervention And it could be interesting to think in other spaces of inequality of education inequality of health care That if you think of the distributions of inequality of those They're much more Shortened perhaps than an income distribution And so in that sense Interventions at the bottom of the distribution will perhaps have again both kinds of Effects of addressing deprivations, but also of reducing inequality in non-monetary spaces Okay, just things that have been covered On the question about charity norms and so on here. I think Probably one of the greatest philosophers all time emmanuel cant had the answer 200 years ago more than 200 years ago The charity private charity is not a respectful relationship for poor people. It is not something we should rely on heavily it can we don't you can't rule it out But there is an important redistributive role for the state and more anonymous and more respectful relationship between Poor people and rich people and I wouldn't want to backtrack on that Although I think with technology there's going to be some changes in in how we how respectful disrespectful charity could be We can go into that The point about within and between decompositions fully agreed I think that's what I was getting at that the between group component of inequality is Is more important than the normal measures suggest as others have said before me I'm nothing more further out on the comments to an Andrea It's terrific. Andrea can make these comments. He missed all the presentations, you know He came in late missed them all and he still has good comments It's really it's really great Finally he agrees with me finally Just on francis point. I really think it's not too far distant future We will never be saying things like what francis does said that ubi is subsidizing people who don't have a job That that mentality my dear friend francis is going to change Let's conclude by saying that for the incoming director of wider Kunal Sen you can see that there are plenty of issues Kunal for you to be carrying on just to just to pick up a few Not all of them is Where does the balance of attention go on poverty or inequality is one type of issue that has come up Which inequality if we're going to which inequality and which are the many inequalities Including the 10 on francis dashboard, but also there may be many others Then in terms of is it perceived inequality Or measured inequality as we measure it in our conventional things. So those are issues that have come up And finally on the policy front, you can see that the ubi discussion is is really going to be is really already Well engaged and perhaps this is this is wider is a is a platform on which that discussion can proceed In a in a safe and respectful way. So with that, let us thank our panelists for a great great session