Highly articulated words are expressed to bring equality in the society.
But expression and implementation are different things.
Whether equality is really required in society is a great issue.
In a simple way, it is said that inequality of opportunities leads to income inequality, and subsequently to wealth inequality.
Between these items, there is a missing point before wealth inequality.
Income is a flow, but wealth is a stock.
Assessment of wealth needs unearned income or capitalization of future income.
Lack of such opportunities will not bring desired wealth.
This is another issue of inequality.
In theory, inequality is measured in monetary terms.
Those deprived of opportunities are basically unfortunate.
In society, people are classified in different categories such as rich, middle class, poor and many more classes in other contexts.
Equality means all are the same. It is possible in theory, but not in practice.
Distribution of wealth or output is blamed as the culprit of inequality.
We are all in discussion about economies with economic theories as policy tools.
Society is rarely said nowadays; rather "economy" is always cited.
At the birth of economic theories, it is considered as a moral philosophy.
With the passage of time, economic analysis becomes a model based analysis supported by mathematics and different other schools of sciences.
Social values are rarely considered under economic models as policy tools.
People in society are involved with different works.
In a work market, work is classified in different ways - upper level, upper middle level, middle level, upper lower level, lower level, and so on.
The work process is basically composed of three types - services, manufacturing, and composite of the two.
Right or wrong, people behind production are lower and upper lower level workers.
Each work step is a part of the production unit, inevitably to finish the process.
Regardless, there is a gulf of gap between higher and lower.
How those from higher levels look at lower ones is a matter of study.
In a simple assessment, there are many segments in the society (economy) including the bracket of subsistence level.
They are not counted in the calculation of national income accounts.
For example, home support hands perform household work.
People under this segment are reported to have led miserable lives despite machine-type work.
Morality is absent here.
Such support services are rare in developed nations.
People can lead lives without supporting services; this is an indicator of developed economies in true sense.
No one is available to work as support hands.
Fundamental issue of inequality
Fundamental issue in inequality is the lack of opportunities which results in monetary inequality.
Within the monetary aspects, all are not equal.
There are differences, opportunities play roles here.
Whereas we live in a monetary society.
Money works as a medium of exchange, inter alia.
Money should come from work-output: the more work, the more money.
But the system can generate money out of nothing.
Such money can go to some people like a conduit.
The ways may either be legitimate or illegitimate.
There are different faces of legitimacy which are kept hidden to avoid regulatory watchdogs.
But legitimate ways are well recognized.
Credit money is one of them.
Here, money begets more money.
This is practiced by artificial individuals like corporate houses generating incremental monetary benefits to few natural individuals.
There are some opportunities in which individuals can have money at one shot against future income.
This is nothing but receiving money which should have been earned in the future.
In the textbook theme, this is known as capitalization of future income.
Individuals who get such benefits can possess capital goods, such as white items, homes, etc., helping to move to the upper stage of living standards.
Opportunity to get money out of nothing or in the capitalization process leads beneficiaries to step to an upper stage.
Is the previous stage inequality?
A question becoming visible requires answers.
The present stage is better compared to the previous one.
This difference is basically inequality in monetary context.
Afterwards, another stage comes with further questions - whether the previous stage is home of poverty.
Considering monetary issues, this is also a relative phenomenon.
Maybe the previous stage is a home of poverty, or people living therein are poor.
But the interesting point is that the present stage may be as good as a home of poverty compared to another upper stage.
Segmental differences are unequal stages.
This is a cycle of jumping from one to another with the support of monetary benefits at one stage and continuity to continue through passive income.
Eradication of inequality can remove monetary poverty.
How it is possible is a matter of unending debate considering societal formation and the output generating process through division of work.
Another question is to what extent of inequality is acceptable.
This seems to be meaningless since inequality is a social discrimination whatever the extent is.
Does inequality equal poverty?
Inequality appears to be like poverty in monetary terms.
There is a term - absolute poverty - used to measure income below subsistence level.
Otherwise, poverty is identified by comparison between or among different levels in the context of income earning capacity.
Before all issues, inequality in moral aspects or psychological contexts is a factor.
It is like psycho-physical diseases which need mental support in addition to medicine.
Inequality cycle is under the iron curtain which is not easy to remove.
People living on subsistence level face moral inequality due to the attitude received from where they work.
This is nothing but a slave-like behaviorfrom upper level which makes people demoralized.
The impact is serious, forming a machine-type human being who is bound to do what is directed.
Creativity is said to be an in-built criterion.
This cannot be created but needs nursing. Everyone possesses unique creativity for which nursing is needed.
Same issue again comes into existence - opportunities.
Opportunities will not be a bar but need moral support to be flourished.
Moral support is a factor here. People can be within inequality brackets with regards to monetary context.
They can come out of the stage provided that moral inequality is not faced by them.
Moral inequality kills the inherent potentialities.
Moral inequality is a curse which makes people demoralized.
This can be removed provided that win-win coordination prevails in different segments of people - equality and inequality.
Is it possible? Old question has been prevailing for a long time without an answer.
Again focus is to give on society which is presently run by different economic models based on mathematical calculations.
Moral values are absent here.
We talk about the concept of "Wealth of Nations" forgetting the ‘Theory of Moral Sentiments’ by Adam Smith, and different schools of value thoughts.
Models without moral values can bring equality in the economy are a matter of issue.
Empirical studies can show reality.
Whatever so it is, there needs to be moral values incorporated in policies without confining mere models.
Values can keep people out of an inequality mentality.
Mental empowerment can, without being depressed, lead to getting rid of monetary inequality.
Fourth industrial (4IR) stage will lead the work environment through artificial intelligence.
People at inequality or under poverty level need to be pulled up.
Moral values in this case can work to bring fruitful results for transformation of inequality into equality.
In other words, a sound mental state can push people to get out of poverty by breaking the iron curtain.
To have significant benefits from current 4IR, moral inequality needs to be eradicated for which moral values are required to be incorporated in fundamental policies.
The author works in the development sector and can be reached at mehdirahman82@ gmail.com