Income Equality and Wealth Distribution

Another huge issue with our population is related to income inequality. The distribution of wealth in the United States is a perfect example of how ridiculously inefficient our global economy is.

According to Professor G. William DomhoffIn, from the sociology department at the University of California Santa Cruz, in 2007 the richest 1% of Americans owned 34.6% of the country’s total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. Thus, the top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country’s wealth, and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%. Financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.” (1)

The United States isn’t the only country with obscene signs of wealth inequality. This is a growing trend around the world. The most notable countries with high levels of income inequality include China, Japan, Mexico, Turkey, Chile, Portugal, Italy, France, and the United Kingdom.

On the opposite side, countries with the greatest index of wealth equality include Solvenia, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Belgium. (2) Countries in the second group also tend to rank better in crime and safety indexes, pointing to the idea that greater equality leads to a safer world for all. (3)

Despite some countries having a fair index for wealth distribution, the point remains that inequality is a worldwide problem. This is mainly because the countries with the greatest wealth inequality are also the ones holding the most wealth.

According to Fortune Magazine, the United States owns 41.6% of the worlds wealth, China follows with 10.5%, Japan is next with 8.9%, and after that we have the U.K., Germany, and France, with 5.6%, 3.9%, and 3.5% respectively. South Korea, the 10th wealthiest country in the world, and they only hold 1.6% of the world’s wealth. These statistics are alarming when we consider that over half of the world population doesn’t live in any of those countries. (4)

Global inequality is growing, and experts estimate that half of the world’s wealth is in the hands of just 1% of the population. The disparity is the result, and the cause, of social injustice, poverty, and war. Countries all over South America, Africa, and the Middle East, have been dealing with these issues for centuries.

New social and political models have developed over the past few decades. These are based on implementing systems such as a resource-based economy, a term originated by Jacque Fresco, founder of The Venus Project.

Resource-based economies utilize existing resources from the land and sea, physical equipment, technology, and human power, to enhance the lives of the entire population. It aims to distribute resources evenly, in order to meet everyone’s basic needs.

An economy based on resources, rather than money, could produce all the necessities of life. It could provide a high standard of living for all citizens, universal healthcare, and better education for our children.

This economy wouldn’t be controlled by greedy people and their personal interests. Instead, it would be run on selfless computers capable of dividing resources fairly, in accordance with availability, needs, and transportation costs. Technicians developing the computers’ software could be working with open code, making sure the global system remains transparent and decentralized.

My calculations estimate that our planet can efficiently sustain even more people than we have today. This, however, can only be achieved if we all work together, using our resources selflessly.

Effective use of new approaches for population control must be implemented as soon as possible. Otherwise, we risk having to accept more severe methods for population control, such as limiting every woman to give birth only once in their life, a policy that China introduced in 1979 to handle their growing population. (5)

Previous Section:

Acknowledgments

Back to Book Menu

Next Section:
Acknowledgments