Social Inequality – Chasing Profits To Destruction

laitman_2009-03-18_8399_wIn the News (from Nature):Why inequality is fatal” In their new book The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better, epidemiologists Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett extend this idea with a far-reaching analysis of the social consequences of income inequality. Using statistics from reputable independent sources, they compare indices of health and social development in 23 of the world’s richest nations and among the individual US states. Their striking conclusion is that the societies that do best for their citizens are those with the narrowest income differentials.

Many measures of the quality of life, including life expectancy, are correlated with the degree of economic equality in each country. A variety of problems such as mental illness, obesity, cardiovascular disease, unwillingness to engage with education, misuse of illegal and prescription drugs, teenage pregnancy, lack of social mobility and neglect of child welfare increase with greater inequality.

My Comment: Everything in Nature is interconnected and geared towards balance and harmony. Currently, as we recognize that we are indeed “a small village” with each part of the world interconnected with the other, it is vital that we sustain balance. The imbalance among us, in society, is what causes the crises.

There is only one way to extricate ourselves from the crisis – and the authors found it. They came to the conclusion that egoism as a traditional engine of progress has exhausted itself and needs to be replaced. Their suggestion is that we make the transition from the system of egoistic consumption to a friendly and unified society: that we move from chasing profits to pursuing venues of mutual interest.

Related Material: Post: How to Change the Direction of the Crisis Post: What is Balance in Nature?
Rabash Article: “The Importance of the Association”
Baal HaSulam Article: “Building the Future Society”

One Comment

  1. Basic common sense suggests that if mankind does not progress together in an optimal fashion towards trade, discriminatory trade is the only other option. There is nothing religious or philosophical about it, but instead it is a natural consequence of utility between the weak and the strong.

    Ultimately, everyone wants the same thing: human progress in an architecture of environmental security – very little of which is being achieved across cultures and societies despite the huge profits made within isolated industries.

    If this is not all of mankind’s business for self preservation, what is?

Discussion | Share Feedback | Ask a question Comments RSS Feed