Over the past few decades, America has been experiencing a lot of alterations. One of those changes involves population growth. The population of America has been rapidly growing since 1950. Decreased death rate and an increase in average human age are some of the leading causes of increasing population. Population growth has tended to be more rapid, especially in lower-working class groups. However, social disengagement arising from growing inequality has not altered. Poverty and inequality are interlinked with one another. ‘Increasing income inequality in recent years has triggered an overflow of analysis and speculation on the causes and consequences of those changes.’
Several rising difference between the distribution of income and wealth as a significant social impediment has seen in both academic and public deliberations. Whereas most of these scripts highlight the adverse consequences, others argue that income inequality isn’t increasing considerably. If it is, then it’s a reasonable and natural outcome within the economy, during which rewards have distributed in keeping with differing contributions to economic output, and which people have diverging abilities and attitudes towards significant damage to the functioning of capitalist economies, that have bought large material edges throughout the globe. Still, others claim that considerations regarding economic inequality are disturbed, observing poverty as the real enigma.
The last dimension elevates the question- ‘whether there is something concerning about inequality within itself that is uncertain independently of the reality that those at the lower edge of the income division are always poor, at least by the suitable nationwide measures.’ Everyone agrees that poverty is a critical social defect that condemns many people to lives that not solely lacks comfort and basic necessities but also dignity and respect that they would get if they were not in poverty.
Imagine a community in which poverty has dropped so that everybody has sufficient to begin productive and fulfilling lives, however, during which there is still notable economic bias. Such society has never subsisted; however, if one occurred, ‘wouldn’t it be useful to adopt strategies to diminish inequality, and if so, how?’ If income inequality is pitching in, or at least not increasing, and if it has no critical consequences on discernment of social justice or economic and political systems, neglect in support of attempts to diminish poverty. If inequality is mounting, and it will have an effect on inherent social relationships, the relevant policy, acknowledgment would be to tackle both each poverty and economic inequality.
Economic inequality could affect economic growth and, therefore, the economical use of resources like labor and capital. Some argue that countries with high levels of inequality experienced enormous economic growth. If true, this may suggest that efforts of lower economic inequality are costly because they reduce growth and prosperity. Studies show that over the past few decades, countries like Korea, France, Norway have a lot of income distributions and had showed higher economic performance compared to the United States. ‘Over the period 1960-2015, average annual French economic growth was 2.75%compared to 3.04% for the United States.’ However, the U.S. growth rate is rising solely because of the growing population: ‘1.03% compared to 0.65%in France.’ Per capita, economic growth reflects productivity increase and is a better indicator of rising economic prosperity than GDP growth, highly influenced by population growth.