NO, the world cannot afford more delays and ought to move forward towards new models of economic and finance structures. Inequality is an endemic factor that is destroying not just current but future opportunities of growing. I have read this article of Prof. Cowen: “It´s not the Inequality, it´s the Immobility” * and it has raised my concerns about the implications of divert the debate of a serious structural problem into an economic circumstantial fact that could be resolved on the short term.

The author assures that “….a lot of inequality is natural and indeed desirable..”, referring to the differences of talents and tastes on individuals as a way to justify that a “good inequality” is needed; is it here where it fails on a conceptual perspective. A “good inequality” does not exists, in fact is a contradiction in itself. The differences of capacities among individuals are part of a diversity that enriches a community and is precisely this that push the international community to have a resourceful system able to fulfil the basic and upgraded needs of individuals.

Centralized the debate on economic immobility reduces the problem as just a boost on productivity, but this is not a matter of reducing rates of unemployment or to be 2 points over on growth rate, but of structural changes and political decisions with vision.

We acknowledge that an important slow down on productivity has contributed to create this finance chaos that led to a very slow recovery particularly on European countries, but not as a way to deny other negative consequences as a system level.

The world needs more certainty and strong action on the road to change finance structures and reshaped a new globalization model if not, were are in risk to continue talking of reduction of poverty, going sadly back on time. MDG´s are over, now we need to keep our focus on SDG´s and particularly on the cause of all evils: inequality, or maybe it´s better to say the painful consequence of the cause of all evils: finance structures and political decisions not basis on transparency and accountability.

There is enough confusion and lack of awareness on the urgent need of taking action on this front to add more shadow on the concept. Inequality is inequality and I am seeing as very dangerous to try to change and reduce the concept to economy immobility as Prof. Cowen does it in this article. Is a long and rough road we have being walked for starting again the debate about reduction of poverty instead of a global change of an unequal system.

*http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/05/upshot/its-not-the-inequality-its-the-immobility.html?partner=rss&abt=0002&abg=0