The High Cost of Inequality
Is inequality worse for us than poverty? That’s what Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett argue, sometimes convincingly, in their book, The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger.
Wilkinson and Pickett examine income inequality across 23 countries. (Income inequality is measured in many ways, but one typical measure is to compare the income of the richest 20% of the population to the income of the poorest 20% of the population.) In Japan, Finland, Norway, and Sweden, the richest 20% are about four times as rich as the poorest 20%. At the other end of the spectrum (i.e., the U.S. and Singapore), that is more than doubled, which is to say that the U.S. has very high inequality (only Singapore is worse).
Does it matter? Absolutely, say Wilkinson and Pickett. They tie inequality to many of our major social populations:
If you fail to avoid high inequality, you will need more prisons and more police. You will have to deal with higher rates of mental illness, drug abuse, and every other kind of problem.
Take the example of health and life expectancy. The United States spends more per person ($6,000) on healthcare than any other country. You’d think that would at least put us in the top half for life expectancy, wouldn’t you? But no. In fact, only 3 of the 23 countries have lower life expectancies than the U.S. (those would be Portugal, which spends about $1,800 per person; Denmark, which spends about $2,800 per person; and Ireland, which spends about $2,500 per person). Highest life expectancy goes to Japan, which spends about $2,200 per person. The same pattern holds for infant mortality and teen pregnancy (see chart).
Conclusion? The more equally wealth is distributed in a society, the better the health of that society. They examine social relations, mental health, drug use, life expectancy, violence and homicide rates, obesity, education, teen pregnancy rates, incarceration rates and social mobility. The pattern holds.
Not convinced? They also look at inequality within the United States, and compare many of these same social ills across states, and the same pattern obtains. The authors contend that if the United States could reduce its income inequality to the average of the four most equal countries (Japan, Norway, Sweden, Finland), we would see:
- The proportion of the population feeling they could trust others increase by 75%
- Rates of mental illness drop by two-thirds
- Rates of obesity drop by two-thirds
- Teen birth rates cut in half
- Prison populations reduced by 75%
Now that’s something worth striving for!
As a public speaker on teen pregnancy, I find this to be an excellent and spot-on conclusion about inequality in our society. Teen pregnancy has long been an adult problem, driven by the economy, poverty, sex abuse and other imbalances of power. This appraoch will do far more for public health than all the other hypocritical appraoches thus far.
Interesting post. I’m wondering if Wilkinson and Pickett address the “chicken and egg” problem. That is, how do we know a host of socital ills don’t cause greater inequality and not the other way around? Their recommendation, “fix income inequality and we will see …” only makes sense if there is a causal relationship here.
They do argue that it’s a causal relationship and provide some evidence in terms of time-series analyses. Whether you’re convinced or not depends on your level of skepticism. I found some of their arguments more convincing than others.