Scanlon And Wilkinson's Two Main Reasons For The Elimination Of Inequalities

Social inequality can either be considered natural and necessary as inequalities creates incentives for individuals to work harder, or it can be considered systematic, an integral feature of social order that creates winners and losers. The former view would not consider inequality a public matter, therefore does not require governing. The latter however, would consider inequality a public issue that can only be reduced by government implementing policies to so. This essay will compare and contrast Hayek’s view of governing inequality with that of Stiglitz.

A society is benefitted by equality because when people are equal, nobody has unfair advantages. Equality provides people from all backgrounds the opportunity to follow their dreams without limits and add in a larger way to society as a whole. Meanwhile, as inequality rises, so does the prevalence of poor educational attainment, high crime rates and mental health problems (Andersen 283). Socioeconomic classes often create inequality and therefore have a negative

"How Economic Inequality Harms Societies." Richard Wilkinson:. TED Talks, July 2011. Web. 26 Feb. 2015.

Compare and contrast Wollstonecraft’s and Marx’s thoughts on inequality. (a) What for each author is the primary form of social inequality? (b) Why, according to each author, do many consider this form of inequality to be legitimate? (c) Why does each author think this form of inequality is illegitimate?

“Income inequality has no necessary connection with poverty, the lack of material resources for a decent life, such as adequate food, shelter, and clothing. A society with great income inequality may have no poor people, and a society with no income inequality may have nothing but poor people” - Robert Higgs. When people think of income inequality they picture poverty and people not having basic necessities. However income inequality is not just a connection to the poor. Income inequality is strongly affected by education attainment, technology, and gender.

French social philosopher, Alex de Tocqueville (1805-1889), once said, “However energetically society in general may strive to make all citizens equal and alike, the personal pride of each individual will always make him try to escape from the common level, and he will form some inequality somewhere to his own profit.” Through the ages, income inequality has caused class conflict, created political systems (communism), and has simultaneously promoted vast increases in wealth and technological advances. The purpose of this paper is to research and examine the benefits and detriments, or pros and cons, of income inequality and to then render my opinion regarding my findings. Because income inequality is vast in nature, this paper will

“The study of attitudes toward economic inequality can be characterized as a study of whether the glass is half full or half empty. Do the poor and the middle class opposes economic inequality and support redistribution, as we would expect them to if they were acting in their economic self-interest? Or do the poor- and the middle-class act against their economic

Inequality is ubiquity in our world, most people are looking at the downside or the surface of this phenomenon. In fact, that inequality is the drive of historical and social progress.

In his article Williams brings to light many issues dealing with social inequality including how many philosophers have felt about the issue. Plato believed that inequality made the wealthy lazy and did not give the poor enough to succeed and Thomas Hobbs believed that the wealthy undermined the way the government is supposed to work and made the poor restless and angry. One of the most influential philosophers of inequality was Jean-Jacques Rousseau, he believed that inequality serves the “particular will” instead of the “general will”, that it leads to civic unrest, and that it destroys the soul.

For example, a person’s position in life determines his or her income. Approximately 50 percent of total income is earned by richest 20% people. In 2010 the wealthiest 20% of families owned 87.7% of America’s wealth. Another factor is debt and stocks. The poor have little to no marketable assets and have a sizeable amount of debt. The top 10% also own 88% of all stock. The bottom 40% own less than 1% of total stock holdings. These examples clearly explain the inequality within society and that the amount of power that you have all depends on your social status and income. Some advantages to social stratification is that if you are a part of a wealthy family or you worked your way up the social stratification ranks, then you are granted more opportunities, money, and are more likely to get the job. I do like this part in social stratification because I do believe that If you work hard enough to get a high paying job, then you should be rewarded for your persistence and determination to better a life for yourself. Therefore, I conclude that social stratification has its pros and cons by producing both discrimination and opportunity to society though I firmly believe each person should be compensated equally based on level of education and

Social and economic inequalities tear the social fabric, undermine social cohesion, contribute to environmental problems and prevent nations, communities and individuals from flourishing (Pickett, 2015).

One of the most shocking parts of this book is Jacobs’ claim that natural inequalities are a myth, therefore an argument for equal opportunities in place of the Rawlsian ideas including the difference principle (Inequalities are ok as long as those disadvantaged by them benefit more than if they did not exist) can be revitalized. Personally, I was on the edge of my seat reading this because being persuaded by such a statement would be tantamount to a sort of freedom I could not possibly imagine on my own. Despite these inclinations to want Jacobs to persuade me, I had reservations. Jacobs’ argument rests on a social constructionist perspective that I am actually partly in favour of and reminds me of a quote I hold

Throughout history there has been a recurring theme of inequality. This inequality is present in

Strength of this chapter is the author took into consideration that there is not one specific way to improve equality. The authors explained how different countries and even states in the U.S.A are all different and they would have to design policies to help them in their effects to decrease inequality. Also another key concept that the chapter makes is simply thinking the poor need to be more practical. A lot of people think the poor should stop having unprotected sex, using drugs, and take better care of their children (). This is an attitude that a lot of people have with the poor and they do not see how inequality is the root to their problem. When a person feels like the world is against them they tended to be more violent, which explains the high level of violence in inequality countries, and depress and stress with leads to high level of

World is facing its crucial challenge; the gap between the rich and the poor, also known as income inequality. This gap is widening and is abysmal. Although income inequality is beneficial at some certain point because it arouse capital growth and technological innovation, I will show that income inequality harms society for it leads to uneven access to health and education and it stifles economic growth that pose serious barrier to social development.