Social inequality creates sick, depressed, violent societies

[starroute]

This book sounds absolutely devastating to *all* the standard American political assumptions -- liberal as well as conservative. It suggests that having a "social safety net" is not enough, that a society like ours where the majority of people see themselves either as failures or as barely hanging on is going to be a sick, depressed, and violent place to live. And the only solution is radical egalitarianism.


http://books.guardian.co.uk/reviews/politicsphilosophyandsociety/0%2C6121%2C1538844%2C00.html

Inequality kills: What counts is not wealth or poverty, says Polly Toynbee after reading Richard G Wilkinson's The Impact of Inequality, but your place on the social ladder

Does inequality really matter? The poor have what their grandparents would think unimaginable luxuries - TVs, telephones and washing machines. So why should it matter to them if in some unseen stratosphere the gated kleptocrats on company boards award themselves staggering sums of money? Does anyone really mind the gap?

<snip>

Richard Wilkinson is a professor of social epidemiology, an expert in public health. From that vantage point he sees the world in terms of its physical and psychological wellbeing, surveying great sweeps of health statistics through sociological eyes. He has assembled a mountain of irrefutable evidence from all over the world showing the damage done by extreme inequality. However rich a country is, it will still be more dysfunctional, violent, sick and sad if the gap between social classes grows too wide. Poorer countries with fairer wealth distribution are healthier and happier than richer, more unequal nations.

<snip>

Greece, with half the GDP per head, has longer life expectancy than the US, the richest and most unequal country with the lowest life expectancy in the developed world. The people of Harlem live shorter lives than the people of Bangladesh. When you take out the violence and drugs, two-thirds of the reason is heart disease. Is that bad diet? No, says Wilkinson, it is mainly stress, the stress of living at the bottom of the pecking order, on the lowest rung, the stress of disrespect and lack of esteem. Bad nutrition does less harm than depression.

<snip>

Homicide rates (and other crimes) track a country's level of inequality, not its overall wealth. The fairest countries have the highest levels of trust and social capital. The American states that have the more equal income distribution also have most social trust: New Hampshire, the most equal, is least likely to agree that "most people would try to take advantage of you if they got the chance".

[Missy M]

1. If anything it is all just pure logic and common sense.

[rbjensen]

2. This makes sense

but I also wonder to what extent too MUCH abundance is killing us. Too much food. Too many cars. Too much time in front of huge tv's. A certain amount of physical work is healthy and most of us are stuck in very sedentary lives.

But I think I changed the subject. Sorry.

Regarding homicide rates, I have always wondered why Canada has so many fewer murders? I am ignorant (sorry) of their gun control laws, but I'm under the impression they can get them if they want them. Why don't Canadain kids kill each other in school? They have a similar history to our own, being "new world" and all that.

Can anybody explain how one border makes such a big difference?

[On the Road]

3. If Equality Isn't the Goal of a Democratic Politician,

I would question their credentials as a Democrat. Lots of material like this is needed for the next big political move back towards the left.

[ikojo]

4. The New York Times Magazine did an article about this

a year or so ago. The gist of the article was that young adults in Harlem and other such places were dying of diseases usually associated with the elderly. Diseases such as heart disease and such. The reason given was the stress of living in poverty with little or no access to regular health care as well as to the stress of living in areas beset by violence.

Maybe someone with lexus/nexis can do a search for this article and post parts of it in this thread.

[moriverrat]

5. Decades ago, writers were predicting a shorter workweek..

Due to various innovations taking the place of manual labor, and that individuals as a whole, would have more leisure time as a result. Nowadays, with all this technology around us, people are now forced to work longer hours for lower pay, and go into debt for things they need.

Where this fits into the equation may be a good question.

[NMMNG]

6. All too true

But for most people respect is measured in money. Low pay tells people that their labour and they themselves are worth little.

The minimum wage stays at $5.15 an hour year after year because the Rethuglicans don't think workers deserve anything better. My agency drops the direct care workers' wage scale by over a dollar an hour claiming they got a massive budget cut. At the same time they hired several new office staff, and interestingly enough their "massive budget cut" didn't affect office staffs' pay scales. Shows how much we're valued, despite what they say at the quarterly staff meetings.

The rich should be forced to live like us for a few months. They'd change their tunes right quick.

[Rich Hunt]

7. that's because

people take wealth but not power into account.