I agree with the functionalists’ argument that inequality can be good for society. That is because various forms of inequality, such as income inequality and wealth distribution, do not hinder economic mobility, neither do they inhibit economic growth. Besides, inequality is not detrimental to human liberty or democracy. In other words, growing inequality always forms the flip side of economic growth, as opposed to shrinking opportunity as some people may think. In fact, it is through inequality that the market generates and distributes innovation, which, in turn, creates job opportunities millions of people (Ravnborg " Gomez, 2015). Innovations usually generate income inequality since inventors exploit such innovations commercially. The generated inequality then attracts new inventors along with imitators, who quickly spread the initial innovation, thereby creating several new opportunities in the process (Ravnborg " Gomez, 2015).
In my view, the present situation in the United States in functional, and inequality has not caused the society to be too unequal. I think the actual problem is poverty and not inequality. In most cases, inequality in the United States could be the price for poverty reduction through the creation of opportunities. Several polls reveal that Americans disapprove of the country’s current income distribution. However, in my view, the income distribution issue can easily be fixed as long as there is no tradeoff between equality and growth.
Therefore, in overall, inequality is good for the society since it forms the mechanism through which the benefits of new knowledge spread in the society and across the world. In other words, without inequality, there would be no incentive to spread new knowledge and the society would miss the most exciting opportunity of increasing its wealth and reducing its poverty.
References
Ravnborg, H., " Gómez, L. (2015). The Importance of Inequality for Natural Resource Governance: Evidence from Two Nicaraguan Territories. World Development, 73, 72-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.11.001
