For a few years now, income inequality has been a topic widely discussed by the media and among tax payers. It is a sensitive subject as the gap between the rich and the poor continues to grow, bringing the existing social classes even further apart. Inequality is a social issue best examined through the scope of two popular opinions. The first of these is that the unfair distribution of profits may also be viewed as a motivation to perform better, work harder and make more than the average worker. The less optimistic and more widely accepted view is that as the rich and powerful only account for a small portion of the population, all those whose profits are lower will have to live in a society where competition, distrust and violence are more common than in countries with a more equal distribution of profits.
Unfortunately, it may still appear the income of the rich is growing faster than anybody else’s. Wealthy, well-educated children born in upper class families do better in school, are more likely to finish college and have a higher chance of success in their adult lives. Although this appears unfair, Tanner (2012) offers an explanation in his article “The Income-Inequality myth”. “Studies also show that what inequality does exist is not the result of the Bush tax cuts or a failure to spend more on social-welfare programs, but on the transformation of the American economy from a focus on manufacturing to information and technology. This change puts a greater premium on education.” The development of the information and technology industries in the US have placed those with a college degree at an advantage: educated workers are more sought after on the job market, and it’s not just the money for a scholarship that poorer kids lack. Tavernise (2012) has put together a list of reasons why it is easier for the rich to succeed in an article called “Education Gap Grows Between Rich and Poor, Studies Say.” “One reason for the growing gap in achievement, researchers say, could be that wealthy parents invest more time and money than ever before in their children (in weekend sports, ballet, music lessons, math tutors, and in overall involvement in their children’s schools), while lower-income families, which are now more likely than ever to be headed by a single parent, are increasingly stretched for time and resources”. She mentions how wealthy parents have the time and money to focus on the development of their children at an early age by enrolling them in math and literature classes, having them play sports and attend music lessons. These activities prevent the child from falling behind in their studies and make it more likely they will consider applying for college or university after graduating from high school.
Having explained the main driving factor in the development of income inequality, let’s move on to show what problems occur among members of an unequal society. These include lower academic achievements among students, violence and drug use, a tendency toward a greater number of young people being imprisoned for various crimes. Wilkinson (2011) has laid out his findings in the article “Why inequality is bad for you – and everyone else”. “For example, taking high, medium and low inequality countries, the homicide rate in the United States in 2009 was 50 per million population compared with 18 in Canada and 5 in Japan.” Homicide is committed in the United States far more often than in countries with less income inequality. 2009 saw 50 murders occur per million population in America. Compare that to Canada’s 18 homicides and the even more surprising figure of only 5 in Japan. “Where there is more equality we use more cooperative social strategies, but where there is more inequality, people feel they have to fend for themselves and competition for status becomes more important.” The author goes on to say balance and trust in our society depends on whether we see each other more or less as equals. Once inequality begins to show among us, cooperation becomes replaced by competition, and trust turns to rivalry. In other words, in an unequal environment, everybody’s goal becomes climbing the social ladder as high as they can at the expense of those around them.
True equality can never be achieved, however, and exists only when resources are so scarce, humans are forced to cooperate and share to guarantee their survival. Pennisi (2014) makes a point of this by examining the primitive peoples of the past in her article “Our Egalitarian Eden”. “Iconic studies of these societies show that boasting and other self-aggrandizing behaviors are not allowed. Offenders are teased, ignored, banned from camp, or, in extreme cases, killed. Humility, humor, and strict protocols about distributing meat helped keep people on an even footing, says Boehm, who has surveyed the ethnographic literature.” These early hunter-gatherers developed a culture which looked down on attempts at securing dominance, as too much food and other necessities in the hands of a single person or just a few people would lead the whole group to starvation or brutal fighting. Eventually humanity passed its primitive stages of evolution and developed more effective methods of producing food and equipment, generating a surplus. Powerful and violent individuals were able to claim these extra goods, gaining power over the rest, who largely remained equal.
Despite what most of the talks on the subject are about, blaming only the US government and economy for the existence of income inequality is, in my opinion, one of the largest misconceptions the public can make regarding social issues. Goldberg (2014) illustrates this perfectly in his article “Define income inequality”. “New York City's new public advocate, Letitia James, delivered her inaugural address while holding hands with Dasani Coates, a 12-year-old girl who until recently lived in a grimy homeless shelter with her parents. James held Dasani's hand aloft for emphasis when she proclaimed, "If working people aren't getting their fair share you better believe Dasani and I will stand up — that all of us will stand up — and call out anyone and anything that stands in the way of our progress!" Goldberg (2014) starts by making an example of New York City’s new public advocate, Letitia James. By bringing Dasani Coats, aged 12, from an impoverished family onto the stage as a symbol of what she plans to accomplish, she claims she will stand up for any hard-working people who are not getting their fair share. However, there is a lot more to consider other than just watching James make a promise she can’t keep. Most cases involving the poorest members of the population bare similarity to Dasani’s situation: often as children they did not receive proper attention, their parents failed to set appropriate examples, and the child simply grew to follow in their footsteps.
In contrast to everything stated above, some would argue that inequality does not exist in the form described in most sources. This finial point of view actually makes quite a lot of sense once we understand the logic behind it by reading Tanner’s (2012) article “The Income-Inequality Myth”. “At the same time, incomes among lower- and middle-income workers have been shifting from cash wages to non-cash benefits such as health insurance and pensions. These non-cash benefits frequently do not show up as taxable income even though they have value to the worker.” Tanner notes increasing fractions of our income are being transferred to fund health insurance and pension programs, something we do not think of when examining our paycheck. “But to make it grow, we need people who are ambitious, skilled risk-takers. We need people to be ever striving for more. That means that they must be rewarded for their efforts, their skills, their ambitions, and their risks”. Finally, the author stresses that what inequality does exist is genuinely necessary for the economy to grow. After all, this promises those who dare take risks and innovate a significant increase in their earnings, and it is always the few who have the boldest ideas that drive a country’s financial, scientific and social progress.
Income inequality is something that exists in every community starting from the moderately wealthy. There are just too many factors to consider as reasons and in most cases, little can be done to address the issue entirely, although it seems every country has its own largest source of unevenness. I propose to examine inequality and poverty in Saudi Arabia. While extremely rich with a sturdy economy, Saudi Arabia’s welfare and charity programs don’t go far enough to help about a fourth of its citizens rise above the poverty line – which in this country is around $17 a day. That said, the government does spend billions of dollars to support these people, moreover, Saudi citizens enjoy free healthcare, education and even burial services. It seems, though, that the incredible birth rate is putting a strain on the welfare system. The population is unbelievably young: two-thirds is under the age of 30. With so many children in families, it becomes difficult for the government to support the ones unable to fend for themselves. Many Saudi families drop to poor status if the men are forced to quit their jobs due to health or other problems. Given the nature of the cultural peculiarities in this country, women who find themselves in a family without a working man may find it difficult find a job and support their often large number of kids.
Taking the chance to express my own opinion on the subject, I would like to agree with the views of Michael Tanner. I believe poverty is a large issue, that it is present in all parts of the world and requires the undivided attention of the global community. Inequality, on the other hand, is a questionable matter. Americans are not actually getting poorer. Salaries and spending continue to grow, the middle class is not encountering any significant hardships, let alone vanishing. Some jobs are simply being replaced by others, the problem is perhaps that humanity is moving at such a fast pace in the 21st century, not everybody is able to adjust themselves to the new conditions as fast as our ever-changing world would have us.
References
Tanner, M. (2012, January). The Income-Inequality Myth. CATO Institute. Retrieved from http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/incomeinequality-myth
Goldberg, J. (2014, January). Define income inequality. USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/01/06/jonah-goldberg-income-inequality-de-blasio-column/4343523/
Wilkinson, R. (2011, November). Why inequality is bad for you – and everyone else. CNN.
Retrieved from http://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/06/opinion/wilkinson-inequality-harm/
Tavernise, S. (2012, February). Education Gap Grows Between Rich and Poor, Studies Say.
New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/10/education/education-gap-grows-between-rich-and- poor-studies-show.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Sutter, J. (2013, October). What is income inequality, anyway? CNN. Retrieved from
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/10/29/opinion/sutter-explainer-income-inequality/
Pennisi, E. (2014, May). Our Egalitarian Eden. Ocus.Net. Retrieved from http://www.ocnus.net/artman2/publish/Research_11/Our%20Egalitarian%20Eden.shtml
