Inequality in the World - Essay Example

Inequality in the World by Student’s name Code+ course name Professor’s name University name City, State Date Inequality in the World Introduction Arguably the biggest economy in the world, the United States of America cannot be held in comparison with such poor nations as Sierra Leone. The fact that there is a significant disparity between the rich and the poor in the world is an undisputable reality. Apparently, in third world nations, there are two classes of people – the extremely rich and the extreme poor (Therborn 2006). This is not because the poor are lesser beings, but because of certain circumstances in the socio-economic orders within the countries. Inequality is an obvious fact, from which no social scientist can shy off. Perhaps, the best way to understand the topic and issue of inequality is to carry out a comparative study between such a developed country as the United States, and a third world country as Sierra Leone. According to the International Monetary Fund report of 2012, Sierra Leone is placed at position 180 out of 182. In straightforward terms, Sierra Leone is the third poorest nation in the world, by all standards. On the other hand, the United States is a good performer, as it tops the list. This paper seeks to validate the statement “There will never be equality in the world; there will always be very rich and very poor people”, in light of a comparative study involving Sierra Leone and the United States. In the third world, the rich control a substantial portion of the resources, while the poor barely access the resources. This explains why the gap between a rich man in a poor nation and a poor man in the same nation is far much wide compared to the gap between the man in a developed nation and a poor man in the same nation. As opposed to the poor nation, the systems of government in the developed nation are in such a way that they promote equality among all citizens (Ferreira & Walton 2005). On the contrary, the systems of government in the poor nations are in such a way that the government is under the control of a few bigwigs, with high corruption rates. What is common between the poor nation and the rich nation is the fact that there is and cannot be equality, since there will always be rich and poor people. Fromm the third world point of view, the inequality, which has been around for quite a long time, is associated with the effects of colonization. Colonization had so many positive and negative effects on the socio-economic statuses of the colonies. This continued into the post colonial eras in these countries. The most significant effect of colonization, which is associated with inequality in the third world nations, is the fact that such colonization distorted the political systems a great deal (Therborn 2006). The first way through which such colonization corrupted the political systems is by indicating that humans were not equal and that the rich were more equal than the poor. They set this trend through having colonial masters, who in most cases were wealthy farmers using poor people as the sources of labor in the farms. After the colonial era, those that stepped into the postcolonial era with the fortune carried on the trend – the poor were not and could not be equal to the rich. Having set this trend, the poor remained to be poor and the rich acquired more wealth. Sierra Leone is known for its high levels of rural poverty. The small country, which was a colony of France, has been through social unrest since the departure of the Europeans. Such social strife, which is politically motivated to some extent, has created what economists refer to as a vicious circle of poverty. This circle of poverty exists in a society and leaves the members of the society poor through many generations to come (Galbraith 2012). The simplest way in which the phenomenon can be summarized is: poor people are poor because they are poor. According to economists, class politics leave some classes poor. As such, the poor cannot access resources. Since they cannot access resources, they cannot accumulate wealth and capital. Because they cannot create capital, the poor cannot make savings. Consequently, they cannot invest hence cannot create capital the circle goes on in an endless series. This way, the people belonging to the poor live to be poor, and so do their children. The result is, the rich continue to be rich and the poor continue to be poor. Another effect of colonization is that it led to the unfair exploitation of resources in the, now, third world nations. Sierra Leone, a country known to be rich in minerals, never lived to enjoy the benefits of such minerals. In straightforward terms the rich colonial masters gained from the riches and wealth of Sierra Leone, at the expense of the country’s future well being (Harrell 2000). The resources that were taken from Sierra Leone by the French masters could have enabled the people of Sierra Leone to develop their country in such a way that its gross domestic product would be high enough to sustain high living standards. Instead, the country was exploited and left poor such that it could not, in the foreseeable future, reach the status of the developed nations. France on the other hand used its natural resources, as well as those taken from such colonies as Sierra Leone, to develop its first class economy. The United States, was under partial British colonization. The colonial period did not impact as negatively on the United States as it did on Sierra Leone because of many reasons. The primary reason is the fact that America was enlightened, unlike Africa (Korzeniewicz & Moran 2009). Secondly, America was too big and had far too many resources. As such, the Americans rose up to fight for their independence before much damage had been done. The major difference between the rich countries, which are developed - like the United States- and the poor nations such as Sierra Leone is the fact that colonization created dependency in the poor nations. The colonial masters exploited the poor nations and made them rely on help from their colonial masters. Much like all African countries that underwent colonization, Sierra Leone depends on France for so many things, including education and healthcare (Therborn 2006). The colonial masters and other foreign donors determine the long term direction of the third world nations. This way, the poor are not in a position to catch up with those that have already developed. Another reason contributing to this is the fact that the resources available to man are limited. Since the resources are scarce, in relation to the number of human beings, there is an inevitable struggle for the little that is available. In such struggle, through certain mechanisms and natural balances, there are losers and gainers. Considering that human beings are not of the same strength and capacity, there will not be equality in the foreseeable future. The fact that economists have associated the strong economic position of the United States with the country’s resources is a clear indication that the poor nations are poor because they are not endowed with resources nor have no capacity to exploit the available resources. Talking of the rich and the poor, as far as inequality is concerned, comparisons can be carried out in two phases, the first being intra country comparison and inter country comparison. Talking of intra country comparison, the rich and the poor cannot be equal because all nations, especially the developed nations, have embraced or are in the process of adopting capitalism (Milanović 2007). In a capitalist economy, the individuals and private firms operate in a kind of free market, where government intervention is minimal. This way, the forces of demand and supply determine the flow of wealth. The flow of wealth depends on many factors, among them, the capital base of the players. In other words, therefore, the rich and well developed and established firms are better placed to control the market and resources. As such, the rich continue accumulating more wealth as the poor continue to get poor. The gap widens and inequality becomes an integral part of social life. Arguably, such things as education are among the key factors determining whether or not there will be equality. While education may bring inequality in such things as gender and the law, it cannot easily achieve equality in economic circumstances (Ferreira & Walton 2005). This is because, despite the empowerment education comes with there are more determinants to economic well being than just being learned. Even so, the learned individual is better placed to be comfortable than the illiterate one since the educational qualifications can place a person in a better position to get a source of income. Similarly, since the developed world has better educational facilities, it is bound to perform better in terms of economic well being. This is not the case in the third world nations. The vicious cycle of poverty explained above cannot allow the people entrapped in it to access quality education and health care. As such, they may not be in a position to access resources. Consequently, the gap between the poor and the rich becomes a constant phenomenon in society. Conclusion In conclusion, it is apparent that, form the foregoing, there cannot be equality in the world, since the rich and the poor have a rift between them, which seems to be permanently widening. The fact that the third world is so much dependent on the developed world makes inequality an integral part of the international scene. The aspect of colonization is among the most serious causes of the inequality. The negative effects of colonization continued deep into the postcolonial period prompting serious problems in such sectors education, healthcare as well as political affairs. The countries that were colonized are currently so much dependent on the developed world to the extent that they are not able to determine their future. Such dependency places the countries on two different socio-economic platforms. Such platforms cannot be unified considering that the resources under the control of the developed countries are substantial. Reference list Ferreira, F. H., & Walton, M. 2005. Equity and Development. New York, Oxford University Press. Galbraith, J. K. 2012. Inequality and Instability: A Study of the World Economy Just Before the Great Crisis. New York, N.Y., Oxford University Press Harrell, A. 2000. Inequality, Globalization, and World Politics. Oxford, Oxford Univ. Press. Korzeniewicz, R. P., & Moran, T. P. 2009. Unveiling Inequality: A World-Historical Perspective. New York, Russell Sage Foundation. Milanović, B. 2007. Worlds Apart: Measuring International and Global Inequality. Princeton [U.A.], Princeton Univ. Press. Therborn, G. 2006. Inequalities of the World. London, Verso. Read More