As this class continues and the more I learn about class inequality I begin to realize that it has existed long before and continue into the future because of the people who are in the right position to make and keep things as they are, so to speak. An article on sustainability brought it to my attention that the United Nations (UN) has gone about addressing and providing solutions to the issues that are the very basis of class inequality. Jencks et al. came to mind with their position that, “equalizing opportunity is almost impossible without greatly reducing the absolute level of inequality, and the same is true for eliminating deprivation.” A blue print is provided to any nation that is willing to make a complete overhaul of the governmental system in such a way that it levels out the competition for goods and services so that all have what they need. It seems to be a good idea and according to the article other nations have done it and successfully restructured the government that created a sustainable society of the people that it governed. Unfortunately, as I read further in the article I noticed that most of the things that would change, the U.S. didn’t want to be a part of and it seems that its all because the rich, based on those who invested money into keeping the U.S. from adapting to this system change.
The guidelines to change a drastically unequal society like the U.S. would change the way funds are distributed and also change the laws and policies that enhance the profit interests of big businesses. Since the big businesses have the financial stability that the U.S. capitalist economy has become so reliant on it is only obvious that the government wouldn’t conform to a drastic change that would benefit the society as a whole. What comes to mind when improving a sustainable society was one of the main points Jencks et al. made in regards to how the “standard of living” has remained the same over the past 50 or more years by the government’s calculations, but anyone who understands basic economics would observe that the “cost of living” or what Jencks et al. call “the cost of participating in a social system” depends on what others who participate in the same social system pay. With the drastic disparities in income and wealth in the U.S. it seems that the rich are going to stay rich and the poor will always be poor at least until money is no longer valuable and doesn’t have power over others to compete for goods and services instead surviving will be more important.