Life in the Modern World: Inequality and its Consequences
Life in the modern world is undoubtedly better than it was a few centuries ago. Diseases do not take as many lives as they used to and wealth creation translates to increased access to resources around the globe. However, there is great inequality in the modern world. Inequality, in this regard, refers to the manner of distribution of desirable things such as income, wealth, and well-being across a population. The inequality concept also applies to the social perspective where discrimination due to personal characteristics such as race and gender leads to unequal socio-economic positions. Concern about the rising levels of inequality has escalated since the recession of 2008-09 when the effects of disparities in resource distribution became clear to the American society. Inequality poses great harm to the society and authorities should seek to fix the situation before it implodes.
The Perception of Inequality
Many in the modern world see inequality as a serious social problem. 30.8 percent of millennials agree with this notion hence highlighting the general view of the public. People maintain this point of view despite the fact that many actually benefit from the inequality. According to a recent study, the three wealthiest Americans collectively own more wealth than the bottom 50 percent of the country's population which accounts for 160 million people (Kirsch, 2017). The disparity between those with great wealth and those with much less is immense thus warranting measures to reduce or eliminate the inequality. However, some scholars argue that this would not be necessary since inequality is a natural consequence of capitalism. Individuals are rewarded according to their contribution to economic output. Therefore, disparities will occur since individuals have different talents and work attitudes. Efforts to reduce inequality would harm the mechanisms of capitalist economies that have contributed to increased global wealth. Accordingly, voluntary and non-voluntary redistribution of wealth is akin to robbery. This discourse seeks to dispute this point of view and by providing reasons why inequality should be fixed.
Inequality and Control Over Others' Lives
First, inequality gives the wealthy a heightened and unacceptable level of control over others' lives. The control traverses many aspects of the lives of those with much less wealth including where and how they work, what they consume, and how they will lead their lives. A proper example is the ownership of a mass media outlet. The individual in control of such an organization would control the self-perception of a societal members and how they understand the society in general. On a similar point, money eases the access to public resources. This concept especially applies to campaign financing in the United States where the rich financiers of political candidates influence the political agenda. Due to the large contributions, elected officials will be more responsive to the demands of their contributors. The result is the diminishing of the fairness of political institutions since the interests of the majority are not well represented. The status quo means that the wealthy 1 percent will continue to amass wealth as the rest of the population bear the negative consequences of the inequality reinforced by the political system.
Difficulty in Creating Equal Opportunity
Secondly, inequality in the society regarding both income and personal characteristics makes it difficult to create equal opportunity for everyone. In the case of income inequality, disparities in the quality of education means that some individuals entering the workforce better prepared than their peers. In the United States income inequality also correlates with race hence compounding the severity of the situation for a significant portion of the population (Croll, 2018). People with few assets will experience problems in accessing loans to start a business of pay for quality education hence acting as an obstacle to larger opportunities. The form of inequality addressed here is based on the notion that some people are much better off than others despite the fact that it is not merit-based in some cases. The effects of inequality could be addressed by adopting some social democracy principles. Subsidizing tuition in learning institutions, for example, would ensure high-quality education for all hence fostering the equality of opportunity in the society. On the point of equal opportunity, it is also important to consider the role of workers in capitalism. Since they participate in a scheme that creates value for the wealthy, they deserve a fair share of what they have helped produce. The fair share principle is controversial. However, inequalities would be permissible if they could be reduced without affecting the position of the bottom portion of the population. This perspective is morally sound and would help improve the society.
Underinvestment in the Common Citizen
The third argument against inequality is that it leads to underinvestment in the common citizen. While related to the previous points, this proposition focuses more on the contribution of the government and businesses to inequality. Due to the influence of the elite in the society, government and corporations have continuously underinvested in institutions and services that offer widespread benefits to the general population. If policymakers do not address the systematic inequality, the country will suffer significantly. Politicians will continue to use societal division to advance their partisan agendas. The result is the diminished effectiveness of government which is a critical too for addressing inequality in the society. The narrative that inequality cannot be addressed lead to inaction which is costly for the common citizen.
Justifications for Inequality
Proponents of inequality use various justifications to further their cause. The consequentialist justification, for example, maintain that while it is morally unappealing for some people to acquire great wealth at the expense of others, the pursuit benefits the society in the long run. As long as there is an increase in general prosperity consequentialist scholars insist that inequality as a necessary evil in the society. However, this justification is flawed since the mechanisms of market economies are only beneficial to the whole society if concerned parties formulate and implement welfare programs that enhance the capabilities of the common citizen. Scandinavian countries have successfully adopted this approach. The second justification used for inequality is the libertarian justification. Proponents of this point of view argue that as long as inequalities are not the result of coercive measures, there should be no effort to rectify them. The rationale behind the thinking is that corrective measures would create a very powerful state hence interfering with the liberty of all citizens. Forcing individuals who acquired their wealth legally would, therefore, be a great wrong and would go against all patterned theories of justice. Like the consequentialist justification, the libertarian perspective is also flawed due to its excessive emphasis on liberty. Liberty is an important moral principle but the weight attached to it in the libertarian perspective is disproportionate (McManus, 2018).
The Call for Action
Inequality is an important social problem and the federal government should take steps to minimize or reverse inequality. The first consideration, in this context, is increasing regulation in the economy and supporting initiatives and programs that seek to spread societal benefits. Unionization is also necessary if equality is to be achieved in the socio-economic sphere. Labor unions use their economic and political power to equalize the influence of political actors around the country. Decisions by legislative units and courts have undermined the effectiveness of labor unions. The consequence of this is immense since the common worker has no one to fight for his or her rights against the wealthy employer. Increasing the minimum wage would also help alleviate the effects of inequality. By empowering the common citizen, the government would reduce animosity between social classes hence building a better society. The effects of inequality are apparent in education and changes in the sector would fix existing problems. Improving the K-12 education system would ensure that even individuals attending public schools receive quality education hence narrowing the existing gap between public and private schools. Subsidizing college education and cutting the debts of graduates would also help raise the economic situation of many individuals once they leave school. They would be better placed to pursue large opportunities without the burden caused by college loans. Other possible solutions to the inequality problem are reducing the influence of financiers in politics, mentoring children from low-income households, and supporting vocational education. While eradicating inequality is virtually impossible, the proposed solutions would greatly improve the current situation. The government should proactively tackle the situation rather than promoting the inaction fostered by political narratives.
References
Croll, P. R. (2018). Economic Inequality and Race: No, It Can’t Be that Bad…. In Teaching Economic Inequality and Capitalism in Contemporary America (pp. 213-220). Springer, Cham.
Kirsch, N. (2017). The 3 Richest Americans hold more wealth than bottom 50% of the country. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/noahkirsch/2017/11/09/the-3-richest-americans-hold-more-wealth-than-bottom-50-of-country-study-finds/#39daed293cf8
McManus, M. (2018). Two arguments for inequality. Retrieved from https://quillette.com/2018/05/10/two-arguments-inequality/
