Why is 'economic inequality' considered a 'problem'?

Question

Some people speak of 'economic inequality' as if this is a problem.

I guess maybe they'd feel better if a doctor and a janitor both made the same amount of money, drove the same car and lived in the same type of home.

What sense does that make?

Answer 1

Because it hurts the left's concept of "fairness", which in their minds outweighs all else. It doesn't matter that the physician has invested 10 years into his education and spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in order to place the letters "MD" after his name. That janitor deserves the same money because it's "fair".

EDIT: Longhaired, why does it matter what a person does to make his money? How is that any of your concern?

EDIT: Steve, I go to Flint every day (I live in Clio). Where are these starving people to whom you refer? President Reagan was right 25 years ago, and he remains correct today: If you're poor in this country, apparently you wish to remain poor.

Answer 2

The problem is that people have no clue about reality. Somehow they think that people DESERVE something for free. Nobody deserves anything except for what they EARN.

Yes, we are the wealthiest nation in the history of mankind, but every resource is still a limited resource. How can people deserve a limited resource? They can't. For example, if there are 100 sick people, but only 1 doctor, who deserves treatment? This is not fantasy land, you can't magically multiply the doctor, you can't say divide him up equally because it is pysically impossible, you must choose who gets treated and who dies. The doctor's services are a limited resource so he gets to decide who has earned the privilege of using the limited resource.

If there are a 100 sick people and 0 doctors, how can you say people deserve treatment? You can't deserve something that does not exist.

This is just one example, but every resource is the same. Whether it is food, shelter, medicine, luxuries, or anything else. Everything is a limited resource and nobody deserves any of it for free. It is not harsh, it is not mean, it is reality. If you want something, you must earn it.

Economic inequality is only a problem for people that have not earned what they want. Economic inequality is just a fact of nature, as long as resources are limited, the only fair way to divide them is by what people have earned. Since not all humans are equal, some will always earn more than others. This is reality.

Answer 3

If the Doctor is to be paid the same as the Janitor why bother going to medical school and spending 20 years of your life getting an education? I would then rather leave elementary school after the 4th grade and start making a salary 16 years before the Doctor and end up having earned much more. We need insentives.

Answer 4

It is problematic in that it concentrates wealth among too few people. Eventually, wealth concentration will slow the economy. The middle class must have disposable money otherwise no one can advance to a higher income level. In other words, it's possible that a permanent wealthy class can be established without any hope for a lower class person to get any richer.
This isn't a matter of wealth redistribution as socialists want to do. It's a matter of keeping capitalism viable so all can succeed,

Answer 5

In case you've missed this .. the Democrat Party has decided that one of the keys to victory in 2008 is to pit the "middle class" and the evil rich against each other in the mother of all class warfare battles. The battle plan is simple. You announce that you're going to develop some nifty new government programs for the middle class, plus lower their taxes, and you're going to finance all of this by raising taxes on the rich --- more specifically, the nastiest of the rich, the evil top one percent.

Note, please, that the democrats try very hard not to say the words "raise taxes." The preferred verbiage is "roll back the tax cuts." It's all in the language. That's why democrats talk of "investing" money rather than "spending" it.

The rhetoric around the Democrats class warfare campaign is both amusing and instructive. It was a frustrating experience yesterday afternoon watching Minnesota's junior Senator .. a Democrat, of course ... Amy Klobuchar on Cavuto. Now Klobuchar is new, but she is clearly a quick study when it comes to learning the class warfare ropes. Her plan for helping the middle class --- and remember, that's the theme --- is to raise taxes on the top 1% of income earners. Interestingly enough, she likes to say that we should go to Washington to find the money to help the middle class .. then she talks tax increases. You almost get the idea that she has no working concept of just who's money she's talking about. When you raise taxes on anyone, let alone the evil top 1%, that money doesn't come from Washington .. it comes from the pockets of the individuals who earn it.

Now ... here's where the frustration comes in. Cavuto asks Senator Klobuchar whether or not she thinks that the 35% of earnings that the richest 1% earn now is enough; whether or not that's fair. He asked this question three times, and three times Klobuchar refused to answer it. She would launch into a discussion of rising tuition rates and health insurance premiums in Minnesota. Now excuse me ... but in what way do comments on rising tuitions and health insurance rates constitute a response to a question as to whether or not a 35% tax rate is high enough for evil high-achievers?

Answer the damned question, Senator!

She knows, of course, that no answer is needed. The vast majority of the people watching her on Cavuto are most definitely not in the top 1% income category. They've been raised an steeped in class warfare rhetoric and honestly, though ignorantly, believe that these filthy rich people aren't paying enough. Senator Klobuchar doesn't have to answer the question ... and indeed she never will. All she has to do is pander to the jealously of the not-rich by promising punishment for high achievers and the redistribution of their earnings.

Answer 6

What sense does this make?????This are some reasons why income inequality is a bad thing to me and a problem.And no communism is not my answer to the problem.
Half the world — nearly three billion people — live on less than two dollars a day.
The GDP (Gross Domestic Product) of the poorest 48 nations (i.e. a quarter of the world’s countries) is less than the wealth of the world’s three richest people combined.
Nearly a billion people entered the 21st century unable to read a book or sign their names.
Less than one per cent of what the world spent every year on weapons was needed to put every child into school by the year 2000 and yet it didn’t happen.
1 billion children live in poverty (1 in 2 children in the world). 640 million live without adequate shelter, 400 million have no access to safe water, 270 million have no access to health services. 10.6 million died in 2003 before they reached the age of 5 (or roughly 29,000 children per day)

Answer 7

Well spewing has a point. but ya know... you dont have to buy sports merchandising or tickets to the game. and you can elect different politicians.. that wont change their salary but we could at least get ones in there who will cut other spending.

And im not sure about what this injustice of capitalism is longhair, unless you mean its not fair that it worked out better for one person than another.

Answer 8

I'm not asking for total and complete equality. Funny how you people always like to (or perhaps need to) oversimplify things as much as you can. I'm not demanding a janitor live in a mansion or drive a BMW. What I want is for every person who works full time to be able to make a livable wage, and have benefits that everyone needs (i.e., health care). Now, let me ask you something: You want people to make your coffee for you, bag your groceries, and clean up after you, but you don't think they should be able to make a few dollars more and be able to see a doctor when they're sick?

Answer 9

Economic inequality works for me.

Putz

Answer 10

Go to Flint, Michigan, where alot of the soldiers fighting in Iraq came from, and you will see why economic equality is a problem. Americans should not go hungry when we have ten billion dollars unaccounted for in Iraq.