Income inequality is a phrase that pathologizes what appears to be a universal truth. In all types of economic and political systems (after we left the forest, and probably while we were still in the forest), some people have been desperately poor while other people are not. What would be interesting is a single counterexample of sustained "income equality."
That said, our current degree of inequality and the particular way it is distributed seems to be unusual and remarkable. But pointing to someone having a hard time is, IMO, not a critique of that.
>Income inequality is a phrase that pathologizes what appears to be a universal truth. In all types of economic and political systems (after we left the forest, and probably while we were still in the forest), some people have been desperately poor while other people are not. What would be interesting is a single counterexample of sustained "income equality."
There's actually tons of data. Almost every western country has a much better "Gini Coefficient" than the US.
> The Gini coefficient is a number between 0 and 100, where 0 represents perfect equality (everyone has the same income). Meanwhile, an index of 100 implies perfect inequality (one person has all the income, and everyone else has no income).
What country has the lowest Gini coeffecient value? Slovakia consistently tops the list.
Who is the richest person in Slovakia? A reclusive billionaire named Ivan Chrenko.
> In Slovakia, 980 000 people were at-risk-of-poverty or social exclusion in 2024
In Slovakia, more than 980 000 people, i.e. approximately every sixth resident, faced poverty or social exclusion in 2024. Both the share and the number of people at-risk-of-poverty or social exclusion increased year-on-year. Poverty indicators in Slovakia have been gradually deteriorating since 2020. On the positive side, the situation improved in 2 out of the 8 SR regions in 2024 and remained unchanged in one. At the same time, more than 20% of the population continued to face poverty in 3 SR regions.
Of course the US is terrible and getting worse by this measure. My point is that nobody is great (the universal truth) - but I grant you that some are worse than others.
In my view, inequality of all kinds is not an enemy to be defeated, it's a disease to be treated, knowing that it can never go fully away. It seems that most would rather treat it as a fact of life and do nothing while it runs out of control, or a heinous evil that must be eliminated. Neither seem like a practical approach.
> In all types of economic and political systems (after we left the forest, and probably while we were still in the forest), some people have been desperately poor while other people are not.
citation needed. inequality was very low for thousands of years. not just "in the forest" but even with pretty large settlements.
Yes, yes ... It's the same as it ever was, only so much more so!
Beyond just critiquing the disparity here, I feel like the psychology that treats capital in such a frivolous way, shifting it about already privileged pockets of society, rather than apply it to any sort of material good is rather abhorrent. That's just my take.
That said, our current degree of inequality and the particular way it is distributed seems to be unusual and remarkable. But pointing to someone having a hard time is, IMO, not a critique of that.