The Neglected Majority
In every nation, state or county that I am aware of there is a tendency for lawmakers to discriminate against the poor, whether directly or indirectly.
Some politicians favour tax reductions for the wealthy. The flip side of that coin appears to be a belief that everyone else should pay for the nation's needs.
In any social group it is a statistical certainty that, in relative terms, a significant majority of people will earn less than the average income. A few millionaires and billionaires can skew the graph to make a nation of underpaid serfs appear to have a very high average income. As an extreme example, if 999, 999 people earn $1 per day and one person earns £10,000,000 per day then the group average income is roughly $11, and statistics don't lie!
Throughout history and across nations the most powerful people tend to do little or nothing to address poverty. Why is that? Excuse my cynicism and probable bias, but it appears to me that keeping people poor denies them access to education and health care. Illiterate people, sick people and people who must work all hours are almost certainly less likely to vote than healthy, literate, leisured classes. But if you are rich and powerful it would appear to make good political sense to discriminate against the poor. Perhaps that is why some candidates for political office can get away with insulting the majority of potential voters.
What do you call discrimination against the poor?
"There needs to be a name for the difference in treatment of the poor."
"What is this demons name?"
Judah Frangipane
I suggest egestatism / egestatist ( ee jess tartism)
Discrimination against / one who discriminates against the poor.
From Latin egestatis - of poverty ; egestati - [directed] to poverty.
