In Chile, ultra conservative right or reactionary using the preferred adjective of the progressives, has been tremendously consistent with the principles of economic liberalism, from the liberalization as portals, to rich of Chile as Pinera and other free-market advocates. I make a parenthesis to not misunderstand the use of the word rich, which annoys the right candidate, but if the 20% most wealthy Chileans earns on average about one million pesos a month, which should be the concept to use for those who you get that same amount but in dollars. In Chile be rico is an adjective that socially bothersome unlike the century of independence where represented a privilege, because the right to suffrage held it to those who demonstrate an income. The latest census made in Chile, the largest number of respondents autodenominaba of middle class and another important number did as poor and both nearly totaling 100%, that is, curiously, in Chile there was rich, I am not certain if the survey considered such qualification, for which used the euphemism of upper middle class and lower middle class, which is ridiculous if you use the taxonomies that define the income of families, because the high middle class, would be divided then between the rich and the very rich.-then, again we turn to our problem of development in Chile, as it is possible to not achieve this aim, in virtue according to development is not a same goal by itself, but rather a level of growth maintained in time. Well, undoubtedly while we are not able to recognize us each in its place, as it says Serrat song poor returns to their poverty the rich to back its wealth.-This means to show the face of society from poverty worthy of which recognizes as such, since poverty sporadic or hidden, middle-class upstart or sometimes ashamed of having to pretend and a rich social classHe is ashamed of being so, as if the origin of his money or having it outside a sin. .