It's a 'million little things' in the system, and most of it is cultural values, some of it is social policy, some of it is not evident, for example, 'inequality' in SF is driven simply by the fact that some people are creating so much value, making so much money it skews the numbers.
When some people in a community make a lot of money - it makes it's way into the housing system and really screws things up.
Also - a lot of the most 'equal' societies are very poor, so having 'equality' should not be a social objective in and of itself.
> Also - a lot of the most 'equal' societies are very poor, so having 'equality' should not be a social objective in and of itself
This is false. Most countries with low Gini coefficients are places like Japan and Scandinavia, while high Gini countries are places like Sub-Saharan Africa and South America. There are outliers, but the trend is clear. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_...
The most 'equal' societies were communist - i.e. Eastern Europe before the end, Cuba today.
When you have absolute equality it's called 'communism' - it was the most destructive and murderous idea in all of human history.
Everybody that I know that is 'poor' is 100% responsible for their level of income. 100%. I have a huge family - many extended cousins. I have relatives that are constantly working, saving - they are wealthy - some who do nothing all day - they are poor.
Fortunately, nobody in my family falls into the category of 'poor because of circumstance'. They all had roughly the same opportunity and made very different choices - every day in fact.
But the variation in wealth is huge. To try to create 'equality' in my family would simply mean those that have worked really hard all their lives would have to hand over money to those who did little.
Equality as a social objective is oppressive and unfair - the Silicon Valley could not exist in that context because those who are creating value on a global scale would be the bad guys.
Also - Japan is a rich country, but they per-capita income is a little behind most modern nations. As far as Scandinavia - they do a pretty good job - but I don't believe their GDP numbers are representative - this is because 'government spending' is part of the GDP calculation, and in those states you have massive government spending, more than 1/2 the economy. Just because the government spends a dollar on something, doesn't mean that a dollar of value is created. Basically - according to the GDP calculation - a dollar taxed from a private citizen, then 'given' to a public sector worker - is a dollar added to the GDP calculation as though it were 'wealth/value creation' and this is rubbish. Also, students in Stockholm region cannot find places to live and there is a several year waiting list for dorm rooms (!!). Same for subsidized housing which is something like 20% of the housing market. This would be unheard of in North America. Also, in North America, homes and properties are much bigger - and this again is not part of the GDP calculation and yet it is (arguably) a measure of greater wealth. So it's very relative. Though again, they do many things well in Scandinavia.
As far as African and less developed nations - there's no point in measuring 'equality'. You have a corrupt elite that consumes 100% of the natural resources money, and then a totally defunct nation otherwise. They don't need to aspire to 'equality' - they need to aspire to 'get rid of corruption' and have an 'intelligently organized' society. More equality will happen as a result of that.
The objective should not be 'equality' it should be 'fairness', and then taking care of those who really actually need help.
It's a 'million little things' in the system, and most of it is cultural values, some of it is social policy, some of it is not evident, for example, 'inequality' in SF is driven simply by the fact that some people are creating so much value, making so much money it skews the numbers.
When some people in a community make a lot of money - it makes it's way into the housing system and really screws things up.
Also - a lot of the most 'equal' societies are very poor, so having 'equality' should not be a social objective in and of itself.