Income Inequality And Its Effect On The Environment

Environmental ethics has widely circled around human interactions with biotic ecosystems. Little voice has been given to city residents who are overexposed to environmental hazards. It is a subject rarely touched upon by mainstream environmentalist. Though conservation efforts receive much media attention and advocacy, environmental pollution in urban areas inhabited by minorities and the impoverished receive less attention despite it clearly being a grave injustice. It fact, it can be argued that minority and impoverished neighborhoods are deliberately targeted by corporations and governmental agencies because of the inherit vulnerability of the inhabitants. It is no secret that the impoverished in this country frequently live in areas characterized

“Health is a state of complete physical, mental, spiritual and social wellbeing, and not just the absence of disease” (WHO, 1974). Health inequalities are the differences in health or healthcare opportunities in different societies this may be due to income,

High profile cases such as the Flint water crisis has brought environmental inequality and environmental racism into the limelight. As such, it is becoming a prominent social justice issue and a political talking point. However, there is much to suggest that environmental inequality is the result of economic factors. This paper therefore focuses on developing an understanding of environmental inequality from an economic perspective.

In Income Inequality: Too Big to Ignore, Robert H. Frank paints a picture to the reader about the struggles of pier pressure. For example: an upper-classmen chooses to buy a big house and fancy clothing. This acts as a “frame of reference” to the changes and norms of the society. If he spends money on something nice, a middle-classmen will then go and decide to do the same thing, and then a lower-classmen…all the way down the social hierarchy. This is what he calls an “expenditure cascade.” Robert relates this with a person’s downfalls, which can be traced due to lower income inequality. Income inequality basically means that in a given quantity, the dispersion of income is underlined by the gap between individuals and or households with

These are a few potential links between social inequalities and the health of the population: income and wealth distribution, unemployment, the ageing society, gender and health, mental illness and suicide and disability and dysfunction. I am going to discuss each of these and see the health impact on people in each group.

The issue of income inequality in the United States is complicated and does not have a definite answer. Income inequality can be measured in a few different ways. The first measurement for the income inequality in a country is to look at the percentages on households and group them into income categories, called distribution by income category. The second measurement for income inequality is called distribution by quintiles or fifths. This is when you divide the total number of people, households, families into five groups called quintiles to examine the percentage of total before tax income received by each quintile. Each quintile would then be ordered by income and households in the category.

Environmental inequality, contrary to what we may imagine, is a social and political problem rather than a simple environmental problem. Environmental inequalities are deeply tangled with political, economic structures and institutions; adding more problems to the social inequalities that already affect our daily lives (Brehm, 2013). So, what exactly is environmental inequality? It refers to the fact that low-income people and people of color are disproportionately likely to experience various environmental problems by living in high risk and polluted areas. If we look at this problem closely we realize “that black, white, and Hispanic households with similar incomes live in neighborhoods of dissimilar environmental quality” (Downey, 2008) and that most people who suffer the consequences of living in neighborhoods with high hazard levels are racial minorities. This allows us to conclude that environmental inequality it is also linked to racism.

In any given population, there is a difference between what people within the population earn. The uneven distribution of income in any given population is income inequality. In order for there to be income, there has to be several sources of income. These sources of income may be combinational or independent per person receiving the income. Income may result from wages, rent, bank account interests, salaries or even profits made in business transactions ( Stiglitz, 2012).

The U.S. is the land of opportunity, but why will so many not achieve the American Dream? There is no doubt a difference exists between the rich and the poor. The most common words to describe social class are the upper, the middle, and the lower class groups of people . U.S. News (Francis) states 46.2 million people, approximately 15 percent of the U.S. population, currently live below the poverty line (Francis). Unequal income distribution contributes tremendously to poverty by making the rich, richer and keeping the poor, poorer.

Wealthier individuals often have more power than the poor and are sometimes even able to maintain their wealth at the cost of the poor. Inequality of income is often one of the most significant reasons for the disparity within classes socially and one of the most important reasons that poverty is often intergenerational. Particularly in this tumultuous political time of divisiveness, people who are willing and able to make changes to the status quo in meaningful ways are of the utmost importance. Closing the gap in wealth is one of the most essential ways to ensure that inequality is addressed and that the other social issues surrounding this gap will be lessened and lessened until it hopefully eventually disappears. Change-makers are more important than ever and those groups and nations as well as individuals with power that are willing to be honest with themselves and

Income inequality has been a major issue in American history. There are many different factors that contribute to inequality. These include education, wealth, discrimination, ability, and monopoly power.

This paper discusses the ideas presented by Richard Wilkinson, in the video How economic inequality harms societies (2011). Three compelling concepts arise from the video which are that there was no longer a correlation between gross national income and health and social problems; it is also possible to attain greater equality as evidenced by what some countries are doing to reduce the income gap; and inequalities vary based on their health impact across the social gradient but nonetheless is present from top to bottom. In order to tackle the health problems and improve the health of individuals within societies, social justice actions geared at the inequalities seen in the healthcare system and other institutions are crucial. This paper also

Rowlingson (2011) agrees with Wilkinson and Pickett that there is indeed a strong correlation between income and health and social problems. In her report she includes the ‘Marmot Review’ (Marmot, 2010) which shows evidence that people living in England in the poorest areas compared to those living in the richest will, on average, die 7 years earlier. This suggests a clear link between class and health. The report further notes other additional factors, such as infant mortality, and mental and physical well being go hand in hand with inequality.

Income redistribution refers to the concept of transferring income from the wealthy individuals to the less wealthy individuals through social mechanisms such as monetary policies, charity, welfare, land reforms, and taxation among others. Income redistribution affects the entire economy rather than selected groups of individuals. The concept of income redistribution emanates from the existence of income inequalities within an economy. Income inequality depicts a gap between the highest and the lowest income earners in an economy (Tullock 13). Income inequality is sometimes considered appropriate in societies since it acts as an incentive in free market economies, whereby in the absence of inequality, elements of economic stagnation and lack of enterprise would emerge. Conversely, income inequality is criticized on the basis of introducing contributing towards the development of key problems in the society, including progression of poverty levels. This paper seeks to explore the concept of income redistribution and its key pros and cons.

Living in a highly industrialized world that is ruled by capitalism, the concern for the environment often takes a back seat. Individuals or companies nowadays prioritize achieving optimal profit without putting into mind what their respective actions or productions may have an effect on the environment. They do not realize how important the role of our environment plays in the quality of human life. We can say that a good environment leads to a better quality life, while a bad environment could lead to a harmful and unproductive life. Now, it becomes unfair and unjust when the risks and costs of a company affect a certain group of people and on the opposite side of the spectrum another group of individuals enjoy the benefits without costs. The individuals that are affected badly are usually from Third World Countries where the distribution of risk and costs are not even (Low and Gleeson 1999). This is where Environmental Justice comes in. Environmental Justice mainly concerns the welfare of human beings (Low and Gleeson 1999). Talking about cities where capitalism surges from, it has been argued that these cities are ‘unfairly structured’ (Low and Gleeson 1999). Basically, what this is saying is that the wealthier you are, the better or cleaner the environment. On the other hand, if you are poor, then the environment around you will have more health risks. This kind of injustice or disparity is what adds fuel to the fire of environmental justice. In