What do you think?
Rate this book
The Inner Level: How More Equal Societies Reduce Stress, Restore Sanity and Improve Everyone's Well-Being
A groundbreaking investigation of how inequality infects our minds and gets under our skin
Why are people more relaxed and at ease with each other in some countries than others? Why do we worry so much about what others think of us and often feel social life is a stressful performance? Why is mental illness three times as common in the USA as in Germany? Why is the American dream more of a reality in Denmark than the USA? What makes child well-being so much worse in some countries than others? As The Inner Level demonstrates, the answer to all these is inequality.
In The Spirit Level Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett put inequality at the center of public debate by showing conclusively that less equal societies fare worse than more equal ones across everything from education to life expectancy. The Inner Level now explains how inequality affects us individually, altering how we think, feel and behave. It sets out the overwhelming evidence that material inequities have powerful psychological effects: when the gap between rich and poor increases, so does the tendency to define and value ourselves and others in terms of superiority and inferiority. A deep well of data and analysis is drawn upon to empirically show, for example, that low social status leads to elevated levels of stress hormones, and how rates of anxiety, depression and addictions are intimately related to the inequality which makes that status paramount.
Wilkinson and Pickett describe how these responses to hierarchies evolved, and why the impacts of inequality on us are so severe. In doing so, they challenge the conception that humans are inescapably competitive and self-interested. They undermine, too, the idea that inequality is the product of "natural" differences in individual ability. This book draws together many of the most urgent problems facing societies today, but it is not just an index of our ills. It demonstrates that societies based on fundamental equalities, sharing and reciprocity generate much higher levels of well-being, and lays out the path towards them.
Why are people more relaxed and at ease with each other in some countries than others? Why do we worry so much about what others think of us and often feel social life is a stressful performance? Why is mental illness three times as common in the USA as in Germany? Why is the American dream more of a reality in Denmark than the USA? What makes child well-being so much worse in some countries than others? As The Inner Level demonstrates, the answer to all these is inequality.
In The Spirit Level Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett put inequality at the center of public debate by showing conclusively that less equal societies fare worse than more equal ones across everything from education to life expectancy. The Inner Level now explains how inequality affects us individually, altering how we think, feel and behave. It sets out the overwhelming evidence that material inequities have powerful psychological effects: when the gap between rich and poor increases, so does the tendency to define and value ourselves and others in terms of superiority and inferiority. A deep well of data and analysis is drawn upon to empirically show, for example, that low social status leads to elevated levels of stress hormones, and how rates of anxiety, depression and addictions are intimately related to the inequality which makes that status paramount.
Wilkinson and Pickett describe how these responses to hierarchies evolved, and why the impacts of inequality on us are so severe. In doing so, they challenge the conception that humans are inescapably competitive and self-interested. They undermine, too, the idea that inequality is the product of "natural" differences in individual ability. This book draws together many of the most urgent problems facing societies today, but it is not just an index of our ills. It demonstrates that societies based on fundamental equalities, sharing and reciprocity generate much higher levels of well-being, and lays out the path towards them.
352 pages, Hardcover
First published June 7, 2018
143 people are currently reading
2964 people want to read
About the author
Richard G. Wilkinson
30 books117 followersRichard G. Wilkinson (Richard Gerald Wilkinson; born 1943) is a British researcher in social inequalities in health and the social determinants of health. He is Professor Emeritus of social epidemiology at the University of Nottingham, having retired in 2008. He is also Honorary Professor at University College London.
He is best known for his 2009 book (with Kate Pickett) The Spirit Level, in which he argues that societies with more a equal distribution of incomes have better health outcomes than ones in which the gap between richest and poorest parts society is greater. His 1996 book Unhealthy Societies: The Affliction of Inequality had made the same argument a decade earlier.
He is best known for his 2009 book (with Kate Pickett) The Spirit Level, in which he argues that societies with more a equal distribution of incomes have better health outcomes than ones in which the gap between richest and poorest parts society is greater. His 1996 book Unhealthy Societies: The Affliction of Inequality had made the same argument a decade earlier.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 85 reviews
March 26, 2020
In their last book they showed that more equal societies are better across the board – they are better educated, safer, have longer life expectancy, and are happier. In this book we are only looking at the impact of inequality on mental health, and it isn’t pretty. We have, of course, known this was the case for a very long time. Research into where people sit in the public service in the UK in the 1960s or thereabouts showed that the lower you were on the pecking order the more stress you were under and the worse health outcomes you suffered. This book provides many more examples of this too.
In their last book they also showed that even the wealthy in less equal societies (even while they retained better health outcomes than their poorer fellow citizens) did worse in comparison to the average person in a more equal society. The point being that ultimately, while everyone benefits from more equality, we generally only compare ourselves against those immediately around us. So, as long as we are doing better than the Joneses we often don’t mind having worse life outcomes than we otherwise might. You know, as long as ‘they’ aren’t getting what ‘we’ have got – we are reasonably happy. Not unlike the poor whites in the Southern states of the US who agree to badly underfunded schools so long as the local blacks have worse ones. The consequence of this kind of thinking (is selfishness a species of ‘thinking’ – I guess it is hard to say) is about to be played out across the world over coming months as the Coronavirus cuts its swath across our poorly funded public health systems.
I’ve become particularly interested in the mental health implications of our current mode of society for years now. There are lots and lots of books on this – but this one is a good introduction to the overall themes as it provides lots of data and is supported with research as well. Essentially, we are witnessing an epidemic of anxiety and depressive disorders. What this book makes clear is that many of these can be alleviated by us making changes to how we organise and manage society. To be honest, this also shouldn’t come as a surprise – it has pretty much been the message of Sociology since its earliest days. Durkheim’s Suicide, for instance, showed that suicide rates in a given nation were related to the sense of social communion that citizens were likely to feel. And that this helped explain why suicide rates were higher in Protestant countries when compared with Catholic ones – Protestants having a ‘personal relationship with god, while Catholics have a communion.
Unsurprisingly, it is similarly true that more unequal societies have less social solidarity. People who get more need to believe they deserve more. Otherwise they would struggle to walk down the street past the homeless – past the botched and bungled – and it is clear people barely see those ‘beneath them’. As such, they have to believe the poor are a species apart. Capitalism invariably drifts back to eugenics, it has to since we need to explain ‘merit’ in some way – and genes provide a perfect explanation circular enough to prove any contingency. Why are you rich? I have good genes. How do you know you have good genes? I’m rich.
Countries with the most aggressively free market forms of capitalism also are the most unequal societies and therefore have the worst mental health outcomes. This is also hardly surprising. They are also the most likely to present the individual as the sole reason for success or failure in terms of economic attainment. Ironically enough, these societies also have the least social mobility – which you might think would undermine the idea of merit being the basis of economic success, but again, if you accept it is all in your genes, there is no need to explain why wealth runs in families.
Capitalism only works is there is an increasing demand for goods and services. This is something Baudrillard discusses in his Consumer Society. That book was his response to Galbraith’s Affluent Society. Baudrillard argues that you can’t be ‘affluent’ if you are constantly in a state of need. But a consumer society can only function by constantly manipulating its citizens so as to make them desire things they never desired before. This is the opposite of affluence. But this endless treadmill of desire is only part of the problem. The real problem for people’s mental health is that our identities are increasingly formed by the products and services we are able to afford to buy. To get you to buy more, marketing seeks to make you dissatisfied. And since capitalism needs you to constantly buy things, it needs to make your increasingly dissatisfied with what you have and what you lack. They don’t even have to rely on programmed obsolescence now – as we ourselves turn over products before they have even had a chance to wear out. As Bauman makes clear, the worst thing you can be is a ‘failed consumer’ – and to prove your credentials as a successful consumer the distance between the showroom and the rubbish bin must be constantly reduced. We are trapped in Veblen’s conspicuous consumption hamster-wheel – and then we wonder why mental health problems are skyrocketing.
This book contributes to a number of books I’ve read over the years concerned with these issues – issues where how we have organised our society is literally making us sick on just about every level. But the mental illnesses we are facing, that are being forced upon us by social inequality are perhaps the most disturbing.
In their last book they also showed that even the wealthy in less equal societies (even while they retained better health outcomes than their poorer fellow citizens) did worse in comparison to the average person in a more equal society. The point being that ultimately, while everyone benefits from more equality, we generally only compare ourselves against those immediately around us. So, as long as we are doing better than the Joneses we often don’t mind having worse life outcomes than we otherwise might. You know, as long as ‘they’ aren’t getting what ‘we’ have got – we are reasonably happy. Not unlike the poor whites in the Southern states of the US who agree to badly underfunded schools so long as the local blacks have worse ones. The consequence of this kind of thinking (is selfishness a species of ‘thinking’ – I guess it is hard to say) is about to be played out across the world over coming months as the Coronavirus cuts its swath across our poorly funded public health systems.
I’ve become particularly interested in the mental health implications of our current mode of society for years now. There are lots and lots of books on this – but this one is a good introduction to the overall themes as it provides lots of data and is supported with research as well. Essentially, we are witnessing an epidemic of anxiety and depressive disorders. What this book makes clear is that many of these can be alleviated by us making changes to how we organise and manage society. To be honest, this also shouldn’t come as a surprise – it has pretty much been the message of Sociology since its earliest days. Durkheim’s Suicide, for instance, showed that suicide rates in a given nation were related to the sense of social communion that citizens were likely to feel. And that this helped explain why suicide rates were higher in Protestant countries when compared with Catholic ones – Protestants having a ‘personal relationship with god, while Catholics have a communion.
Unsurprisingly, it is similarly true that more unequal societies have less social solidarity. People who get more need to believe they deserve more. Otherwise they would struggle to walk down the street past the homeless – past the botched and bungled – and it is clear people barely see those ‘beneath them’. As such, they have to believe the poor are a species apart. Capitalism invariably drifts back to eugenics, it has to since we need to explain ‘merit’ in some way – and genes provide a perfect explanation circular enough to prove any contingency. Why are you rich? I have good genes. How do you know you have good genes? I’m rich.
Countries with the most aggressively free market forms of capitalism also are the most unequal societies and therefore have the worst mental health outcomes. This is also hardly surprising. They are also the most likely to present the individual as the sole reason for success or failure in terms of economic attainment. Ironically enough, these societies also have the least social mobility – which you might think would undermine the idea of merit being the basis of economic success, but again, if you accept it is all in your genes, there is no need to explain why wealth runs in families.
Capitalism only works is there is an increasing demand for goods and services. This is something Baudrillard discusses in his Consumer Society. That book was his response to Galbraith’s Affluent Society. Baudrillard argues that you can’t be ‘affluent’ if you are constantly in a state of need. But a consumer society can only function by constantly manipulating its citizens so as to make them desire things they never desired before. This is the opposite of affluence. But this endless treadmill of desire is only part of the problem. The real problem for people’s mental health is that our identities are increasingly formed by the products and services we are able to afford to buy. To get you to buy more, marketing seeks to make you dissatisfied. And since capitalism needs you to constantly buy things, it needs to make your increasingly dissatisfied with what you have and what you lack. They don’t even have to rely on programmed obsolescence now – as we ourselves turn over products before they have even had a chance to wear out. As Bauman makes clear, the worst thing you can be is a ‘failed consumer’ – and to prove your credentials as a successful consumer the distance between the showroom and the rubbish bin must be constantly reduced. We are trapped in Veblen’s conspicuous consumption hamster-wheel – and then we wonder why mental health problems are skyrocketing.
This book contributes to a number of books I’ve read over the years concerned with these issues – issues where how we have organised our society is literally making us sick on just about every level. But the mental illnesses we are facing, that are being forced upon us by social inequality are perhaps the most disturbing.
July 22, 2018
A good read. I never read The Spirit Level, however I still enjoyed reading this book. It brings an stoic and scientific tone of writing to a subject often mired in emotion.
The greatest strength of the book is the slow, logical (and often long) paths through complex problems common in society. If you ask people why they smoke, overwork, gamble or buy impractical sports cars, then they will often struggle to explain why they enjoy doing it. Linda Tirado tried (and i.m.o., failed miserably) to explain why poor people often smoke in her book Hand To Mouth. However, this is where Inner Level succeeds. The authors take you through the nuances of psychology to explain these as public health concerns are beyond the control of individuals.
The biggest fault with the book is the introduction of environmentalism near the end. This seems like an unnecessary deviation from the theme of the book. It is certainly worth a mention, however it is given too much weight toward the end, and thus distracts from the major idea of the book: that tolerating inequality harms people.
The other fault with this book is that it is repetitive, often reminding the reader at milestones throughout the book. But, I find that is common amongst expository texts, so no biggie.
For those not sure if this book is for them, just read the introduction. It concisely and articulately captures everything the book says.
The greatest strength of the book is the slow, logical (and often long) paths through complex problems common in society. If you ask people why they smoke, overwork, gamble or buy impractical sports cars, then they will often struggle to explain why they enjoy doing it. Linda Tirado tried (and i.m.o., failed miserably) to explain why poor people often smoke in her book Hand To Mouth. However, this is where Inner Level succeeds. The authors take you through the nuances of psychology to explain these as public health concerns are beyond the control of individuals.
The biggest fault with the book is the introduction of environmentalism near the end. This seems like an unnecessary deviation from the theme of the book. It is certainly worth a mention, however it is given too much weight toward the end, and thus distracts from the major idea of the book: that tolerating inequality harms people.
The other fault with this book is that it is repetitive, often reminding the reader at milestones throughout the book. But, I find that is common amongst expository texts, so no biggie.
For those not sure if this book is for them, just read the introduction. It concisely and articulately captures everything the book says.
December 30, 2021
Apologies for the lengthy review/ramble. Wealth Inequality has long been a special interest (pet hate?) of mine, and Pickett and Wilkinson's first piece on the matter - The Spirit Level - was a hugely influential book on my thinking.
To be honest I was slow to pick up Inner Level though, as I kinda thought that the thorough and robust Spirit Level hardly left anything more to present.
I was completely wrong.
The Inner level focusses much more on the personal effects of wealth inequality and expands the detail into how inequality impacts mental health, through status anxiety and mistrust. Where Spirit Level was much more statistical and aimed at a societal level, Inner Level is much more individual, and much more accessible and relevant to all people. In some regards Inner Level isn't so much a sequal or follow-up but an advanced expansion that would be totally appropriate to pick up first if desired.
Furthermore where Inner Level expands on solutions and possible positive change, which while not a lot different to the Spirit Levels findings did feel much more productively and hopefully presented.
For anyone concerned that the issue is just the far left of politics I would emplore a reconsideration. Wealth inequality, while obviously tied deeply to politics is much deeper and more concerning. There isn't any hopefuly communist or marxist sentiment in this book - although there is a little longing for egalitarian times of hunter gatherers (a different topic I have much interest in).
To me the issue of wealth inequality isn't so much about fairness or rescuing the poor (although both are good things) wealth inequality is in fact harmful for all people, even the ultra-wealthy whose positions are much more unstable and let's face it no matter how rich you are you still have to live in a world filled with the 99% and if 99% of people are miserable, times are not going to be great.
My final thought NOT from the Inner Level, but a thesis I have myself, that addressing wealth inquality will in fact financially and ecomocially benefit the 1% anyway - I don't think its a question of spreading the currently wealth around but rather organizing ourselves in a way that generates wealth more equally - which would in fact create more wealth to go to the top 1% right? (this is at the very least what I would say to some hugely weathly individual who was concerned)
In summary this is a super accessible and super important book. Wealth inequality has impacts on almost all elements of human experience, from climate change, prejudice, mental and physical health, yet its an area not often (although more often than 10 years ago) spoken of when trying to solve all the problems of the world.
Highly recommended.
To be honest I was slow to pick up Inner Level though, as I kinda thought that the thorough and robust Spirit Level hardly left anything more to present.
I was completely wrong.
The Inner level focusses much more on the personal effects of wealth inequality and expands the detail into how inequality impacts mental health, through status anxiety and mistrust. Where Spirit Level was much more statistical and aimed at a societal level, Inner Level is much more individual, and much more accessible and relevant to all people. In some regards Inner Level isn't so much a sequal or follow-up but an advanced expansion that would be totally appropriate to pick up first if desired.
Furthermore where Inner Level expands on solutions and possible positive change, which while not a lot different to the Spirit Levels findings did feel much more productively and hopefully presented.
For anyone concerned that the issue is just the far left of politics I would emplore a reconsideration. Wealth inequality, while obviously tied deeply to politics is much deeper and more concerning. There isn't any hopefuly communist or marxist sentiment in this book - although there is a little longing for egalitarian times of hunter gatherers (a different topic I have much interest in).
To me the issue of wealth inequality isn't so much about fairness or rescuing the poor (although both are good things) wealth inequality is in fact harmful for all people, even the ultra-wealthy whose positions are much more unstable and let's face it no matter how rich you are you still have to live in a world filled with the 99% and if 99% of people are miserable, times are not going to be great.
My final thought NOT from the Inner Level, but a thesis I have myself, that addressing wealth inquality will in fact financially and ecomocially benefit the 1% anyway - I don't think its a question of spreading the currently wealth around but rather organizing ourselves in a way that generates wealth more equally - which would in fact create more wealth to go to the top 1% right? (this is at the very least what I would say to some hugely weathly individual who was concerned)
In summary this is a super accessible and super important book. Wealth inequality has impacts on almost all elements of human experience, from climate change, prejudice, mental and physical health, yet its an area not often (although more often than 10 years ago) spoken of when trying to solve all the problems of the world.
Highly recommended.
February 7, 2021
What a great book that fluidly dissects the feelings of inadequacy, social stress, us vs them mentalities, and desires for consumption all as they relate to growing inequality.
It's crazy how much it permeates in every facet of life, not just in lower classes but all classes. Inequality makes you stressed about your social standing and how others perceive you, negatively alters your belief about how you see yourself, brings about more mental illness and substance abuse due to feelings of inadequacy, pins you against others more easily, inhibits a sense of community and belonging, affects child well-being as early as the age of five, and a whole slew of other things! More unequal countries also have higher incarceration rates, more people employed as bodyguards, lower ages at which we hold people (read: children) criminally accountable, lower literacy rates, and just messes with everything! Fuck!
The worst part about this is that it doesn't have to be this way and it's not even human nature to have such intense social stratification! This is a very recent development in the scheme of human existence (within the last 7,000 years). Makes me very angry at the greed of elites and the perpetuation of societally-defeating myths (such as those at the top are inherently smarter/better or are self-made and those at the bottom just aren't working hard enough or are dumb).
Have very little faith that the US can do anything about this. We hate unions but need our workers, we love the rich but hate living wages, climate change is too expensive to fix but we blow up the deficit with tax cuts.
Rage-induction level: 8/10
Read this book and move to Scandinavia.
P.S. On a more personal note, I couldn't help but take away how inequality affects my own life and those around me. I look at a family member of mine who worked their way up, yet has such anger against those below them, those that don't "work hard." They project the myth of meritocracy while forsaking the absolute dumb luck of their circumstances. They spend money on material goods and nice things, all a front to show what class they're in, show how superior they are, yet indulge in their liquor cabinet and gambling habits to cope with the endless struggle of never being enough in society's eyes. It's hard to not see the correlations in this book and apply it to your own life and those you know.
The authors claim at the beginning that this isn't a self-help book, but I disagree! I found it extremely helpful to examine my own views and feelings through the lens of inequality, to check against my misperceived feelings of worth, sup/inferiority, and social standing. Def worth a read.
It's crazy how much it permeates in every facet of life, not just in lower classes but all classes. Inequality makes you stressed about your social standing and how others perceive you, negatively alters your belief about how you see yourself, brings about more mental illness and substance abuse due to feelings of inadequacy, pins you against others more easily, inhibits a sense of community and belonging, affects child well-being as early as the age of five, and a whole slew of other things! More unequal countries also have higher incarceration rates, more people employed as bodyguards, lower ages at which we hold people (read: children) criminally accountable, lower literacy rates, and just messes with everything! Fuck!
The worst part about this is that it doesn't have to be this way and it's not even human nature to have such intense social stratification! This is a very recent development in the scheme of human existence (within the last 7,000 years). Makes me very angry at the greed of elites and the perpetuation of societally-defeating myths (such as those at the top are inherently smarter/better or are self-made and those at the bottom just aren't working hard enough or are dumb).
Have very little faith that the US can do anything about this. We hate unions but need our workers, we love the rich but hate living wages, climate change is too expensive to fix but we blow up the deficit with tax cuts.
Rage-induction level: 8/10
Read this book and move to Scandinavia.
P.S. On a more personal note, I couldn't help but take away how inequality affects my own life and those around me. I look at a family member of mine who worked their way up, yet has such anger against those below them, those that don't "work hard." They project the myth of meritocracy while forsaking the absolute dumb luck of their circumstances. They spend money on material goods and nice things, all a front to show what class they're in, show how superior they are, yet indulge in their liquor cabinet and gambling habits to cope with the endless struggle of never being enough in society's eyes. It's hard to not see the correlations in this book and apply it to your own life and those you know.
The authors claim at the beginning that this isn't a self-help book, but I disagree! I found it extremely helpful to examine my own views and feelings through the lens of inequality, to check against my misperceived feelings of worth, sup/inferiority, and social standing. Def worth a read.
February 24, 2021
More equal societies improve wellbeing. We learned this from the Spirit Level. This book shows how inequality gets under the skin. It explores the cultural and psychosocial mechanisms involved, as well as the evolutionary roots of our reaction to inequality. The book sometimes meanders off the path, and not all parts are equally convincing, but overall this is a great companion to the Spirit Level. My personal favorite as a person who spends quite a lot of time researching social problems was the section on the evolutionary roots. We are contradictory creatures, with deeply vired behavioral mechanisms that both push us towards status-seeking and egalitarian cooperation. However, our egalitarian part is completely overwhelmed by the competitive society we created, and our psyche is endangered by the social-evaluative threat so prevalent in unequal, competitive market societies. Wilkinson and Picket also show how in contrast to mainstream economics, humans had spent around 95% of the last 250,000 years - the period when we roughly looked biologically the way we do now - in cooperative communities, and how these communities comprised strategies to fight off dominance. This won't be new for those of you familiar with Polanyi and Sahlins (and his provocative 'The original affluent society') but put in the context of the book the insights work very well. One might criticize the authors for not digging into the social roots of inequality, neglecting the political economy of class and race, but they make up for this omission in the last section of the book that contains their vision. What they propose is a kind of scientifically-based democratic eco-socialism, with far-reaching structural change. Altogether: absolutely worth your time.
July 27, 2020
As the global economy stratifies into haves and have nots even further, the research and insight provided by this book are more necessary than ever. It’s hard to even imagine a counter argument to everything presented by the authors here; they’re so thorough in a relatively small amount of pages comparatively. More equal societies improve individual wellbeing by nearly every metric. One can only hope we will finally heed their advice over here in the States.
March 9, 2019
This well-researched, accessibly written follow-up to "The Spirit Level" analyzes the negative impact that inequality has on society and how equitable policies have widespread benefits.
In particular, they focus on five impacts of inequality: (1) it makes problems with social gradients worse (that is, problems related to social status get worse when income differences are bigger), (2) inequality reduces social mixing and social mobility, (3) inequality reduces social cohesion, and (4) inequality increase status anxiety, and (5) inequality heightens consumerism and conspicuous consumption (to the detriment of the environment).
Their book synthesizes a lot of studies and provides many striking, if not surprising, graphs about the correlation between inequality and various social phenomena. In their conclusion, they survey policy proposals for reducing inequality and increasing well-being (the role of strengthening labor unions is especially important). As Wilkinson and Pickett note, humans have an evolutionary aversion to extreme inequality, and it's time to harness that for the political will to close the vast divides that exist today (and which have grown especially worse since the 1970s in the developed world).
In particular, they focus on five impacts of inequality: (1) it makes problems with social gradients worse (that is, problems related to social status get worse when income differences are bigger), (2) inequality reduces social mixing and social mobility, (3) inequality reduces social cohesion, and (4) inequality increase status anxiety, and (5) inequality heightens consumerism and conspicuous consumption (to the detriment of the environment).
Their book synthesizes a lot of studies and provides many striking, if not surprising, graphs about the correlation between inequality and various social phenomena. In their conclusion, they survey policy proposals for reducing inequality and increasing well-being (the role of strengthening labor unions is especially important). As Wilkinson and Pickett note, humans have an evolutionary aversion to extreme inequality, and it's time to harness that for the political will to close the vast divides that exist today (and which have grown especially worse since the 1970s in the developed world).
December 16, 2018
Goes some distance into explaining why we are where we are, right now, in the West, both as divided societies and as anguished individuals within these societies.
A revelation on every page about the catastrophic damage that inequality (particularly status inequality) is inflicting upon our minds, health, behaviour and the environment.
What I really like about Pickett and Wilkinson's angle, is that they are epidemiologists, scientists who study diseases, their outbreaks, spread, but also their prevention. An expertise they have turned upon the spread and consequences of inequality in society. Their 'Spirit Level' book is also a game-changer and essential reading.
In our culture of speedy SM newsfeeds, flashing screens and apps, the book was also an important reminder to me of how books remain an essential load-bearing beam in a civilised society. They reflect, they examine, they still the mind, they open eyes.
Most important non-fiction book I read in 2018. Could not have been published at a better time.
A revelation on every page about the catastrophic damage that inequality (particularly status inequality) is inflicting upon our minds, health, behaviour and the environment.
What I really like about Pickett and Wilkinson's angle, is that they are epidemiologists, scientists who study diseases, their outbreaks, spread, but also their prevention. An expertise they have turned upon the spread and consequences of inequality in society. Their 'Spirit Level' book is also a game-changer and essential reading.
In our culture of speedy SM newsfeeds, flashing screens and apps, the book was also an important reminder to me of how books remain an essential load-bearing beam in a civilised society. They reflect, they examine, they still the mind, they open eyes.
Most important non-fiction book I read in 2018. Could not have been published at a better time.
November 15, 2020
A great book on how class inequality affects our social and private lives, happiness, emotions, and mental health. Loved the level of detail and the amount of data and linked studies provided — it makes The Inner Level a very interesting read, and a new (to me) way to think about equality, reasons and ways to reduce consumerism, and progressive policies in general.
April 22, 2022
A follow up to the authors’ classic ‘The Spirit Level’ in which the links between the politics of inequality meet the psychology of social anxiety. A carefully researched and lucidly presented book for our unsettled times.
This is my video review:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMqP2...
This is my video review:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMqP2...
April 4, 2025
How Capitalism, Inequality, and Hierarchical society nake us hyper aware of status and socialy anxious bcos of it, spending more to pretend to have higher status than we do and viewing ourselves negatively if we're struggling bcos of the belief it's all to do with personal traits, going as far as to affect young children in poverty as early as age 3.
Amazing book that everyone should read, though would've like a bit more about how bigotry affects us, it was mostly about wealth inequality.
Amazing book that everyone should read, though would've like a bit more about how bigotry affects us, it was mostly about wealth inequality.
February 16, 2026
The Spirit Level (2009) has been on my list for so long that it got relegated to unread. I didn't want to repeat that mistake with The Inner Level, so I bought it as soon as it came up on my radar. 8 years after it was published, but hey! The authors provide a quick get-to-speed about the former whose core idea was that people in societies with bigger income gaps are more likely to suffer from a wide range of health and social problems. Not just the poor, mind you, but a vast majority of the population. This book focuses on how the increased social stress and psychological effects that lie beneath that phenomenon impact how we think, feel, relate to each other, and evaluate ourselves and others. In doing that, they weave their arguments using psychology, sociology, neuroscience, and real-world data to show that it's not just economic outcomes that inequality impacts, but our psychological well-being, inner lives, and social fabric too.
The paradox of modern life is quite fascinating - even in wealthy nations, though material standards have risen - better housing, technology, medicine, education etc - levels of anxiety, depression, loneliness, addiction, and social discontent are high and, in many cases, increasing. While the authors acknowledge that inequality is not the only factor affecting well-being, they argue that it is a powerful and under-recognised force. They question assumptions that economic growth automatically improves happiness, showing instead that relative position matters as much, if not more, than absolute material gain once basic needs are met. Social context matters: the more unequal a society, the more likely people are to suffer in invisible but profound ways. The authors push back on the idea that individual failings - lack of effort, moral weakness, or character flaws - are the primary drivers of these trends. And introduce the underlying reason - “status anxiety” early on. Its origins are a combination of two differing legacies - pre-human dominance ranking system (might is right) and the egalitarian period of our prehistory (resistance to dominance).
As a social species, our sensitivity to each other and ability to avoid words/behaviour that offends others were important for survival and reproductive success. We are inherently social evaluators, and our brains are tuned to assess where we stand in the social hierarchy. But, just as with stress, when it gets triggered regularly in daily life, for even people who are materially comfortable but constantly compare themselves with others to judge their worth, the psychological stress that arises is incessant. In relatively equal societies, status comparisons still occur, but the gaps are smaller and the competition less obsessive. In unequal societies, the scope of comparison widens and intensifies, people are acutely aware of who has more, who has less, who wins and who loses. Large income gaps stimulate three kinds of response - some are overcome by low self-esteem, lack of confidence and depression, others become increasingly narcissistic, and deploy various forms of self-aggrandizement to bolster their position in others' eyes. Both are responses to increased anxiety and so, both types of people are likely to fall prey to drugs, alcohol, and consumerism to improve their self presentation.
The Inner Level throws light on five important links. One, inequality makes problems with social gradients worse - health, violence, poor education rates, substance abuse etc that are seen more down the social order are 2-10x more common in unequal societies. Two, inequality affects social mixing, as social hierarchy becomes more rigid and people in different classes become even more separated from each other. Three, inequality affects social cohesion, as people not only find social contact increasingly awkward (for fear of being judged) but are also less empathetic and less keen on community and less willing to contribute to collective goods. Four, inequality increases anxieties about status. Some people respond to heightened social evaluative threats (Dominance Behavioural System, notes below), the potential downward mobility and loss of confidence through self enhancement - flaunting more, others fall to schizophrenia and other mental health issues. Five, inequality heightens consumerism and conspicuous consumption. Money becomes even more important in unequal societies, as a means to flaunt more by way of consumption.
Broadly, the mechanism is pretty obvious - when income gaps widen, social distances grow, trust erodes, and people become more focused on self-presentation and status markers. An important theme in the book is the interplay between external conditions and internal states. The authors illustrate how unequal environments shape our self-perceptions- people become more self-focused, more vigilant about threats to status, more distrustful, more inclined to see others as competitors rather than collaborators, and exhibit greater prejudice toward those perceived as lower status.This psychological shift, they suggest, fuels many contemporary problems - from the opioid epidemic in the U.S. to rising suicide rates in Japan and Scandinavia. Children growing up in such environments face particular challenges, experiencing more bullying, lower self-esteem, and reduced educational performance regardless of their family's actual income level. To note that our self perception and feelings about our social situation and circumstances can alter the expression of hundreds of genes.
Again, the authors emphasise that these psychological harms affect everyone, not just the poor. They argue that inequality isn't merely an economic issue or an individual issue but a profound public health crisis affecting our inner lives. Even wealthy individuals in unequal societies experience more anxiety and status stress than their counterparts in more equal nations. The constant need to maintain position, display success, and defend against perceived threats creates what they describe as a toxic psychological environment.
The final portion of the book is on how reducing inequality can reverse these trends. Countries that have narrowed income gaps show corresponding improvements in social trust, mental health, and community cohesion. The authors advocate for policies including progressive taxation, stronger labor protections, and employee ownership models that can create more economically democratic societies. Not as abstract economic reforms, but as investments in psychological health, social cohesion, and human dignity.
I found The Inner Level reveals connections with many books I have read in the recent past - Why Zebras don't get Ulcers, Humankind, The Worm At The Core, to name a few. Death anxiety (The Worm at the Core) connects to stress (Why Zebras don't get Ulcers) as well as status (The Inner Level). Both are survival skills that have started working against us in the modern environment. Humankind also refers back to egalitarian pre-agriculture societies because we used to apply reverse-dominance strategies to rein in those who tried to be dominant, and is optimistic about how we are fundamentally kind and can still retrieve things before it gets out of hand. The Inner Level provides a good perspective of why it is important and how we could attempt this. An important read for this age.
Notes
1. The modern rates of high mobility mean that whether we like it or not, our identity is no longer settled, maintained and confirmed by other people's lifelong knowledge of us. As a result, our sense of ourselves becomes less well anchored, more prone to ups and downs, and more at the mercy of passing moods.
2. Ascribed and achieved social class. In societies with less
3. Dominance Behavioural System - 2X2 of dominance-submission, hostile-warm creates 4 quadrants, and except for dominance-warmth, all cause mental health issues of some sort.
4. Materialism makes us unhappy. But being unhappy also makes us materialistic.
5. IQ tests measure 'habits of mind' that are cultural and learned, rather than innate.
6. Inequality actually fell between 1930 and 1970, and then started rising again.
7. How everyone understands and experiences their relatively superior or inferior position in society also differs according to whether people normally remain in the class or caste they (and often previous generations of their family) were born into, or whether their social position can change. This is the distinction between what sociologists call 'ascribed' and 'achieved social class. In societies when there is little or no social mobility, class is seen simply as an accident of birth and, although your class or caste may be seen as inferior there is little sense that you are personally culpable for your low social status: you can't be blamed for your parentage. But in societies where people are regarded as moving up or down the social ladder according to individual merit and effort, status appears much more as a reflection of personal ability or virtue, making low social status appear as a mark of individual failure.
8. The belief that modern market democracies are 'meritocratic', that class position therefore reflects ability, implies that these societies are in some sense fair: that differences in status are justified . The result is that low social status appears even more as if it were a mark of personal inadequacy and failure. It strengthens the widespread tendency to assess people's ability and intelligence on the basis of their social position, making low social status still demeaning. Nor are these tendencies confined to how we judge others. They also raise or lower people's belief in their own intelligence and ability. The belief that social status reflects personal worth starts in schools (comparison of abilities) but continues in adulthood through interviews and assessments of many different kinds.
9. All societies like to think of themselves as ones in which honest, law-abiding, hard-working citizens can make a living, contribute to society and find fulfilment. We expect our institutions - whether schools, businesses or governments - to reward moral, ethical behaviour, hard work and co-operation. However, inequality and the heightened status competition and individualism which go with it seem to contribute to a culture in which 'greed is good', risk-taking is admired, and the differences between overly dominant behaviour and leadership are elided. In such a climate, it is perhaps no wonder that individuals with a personality disorder characterised by lying, manipulation, deceit, egocentricity and callousness can often be found at the very top of modern corporate structures. Greater inequality not only causes psychopathic tendencies to manifest in more people, it provides the cut-throat environment in which those tendencies come to be seen as admirable or valuable, and competitiveness as more important than co-operation.
10. Entry into school systems is almost always determined by an annual cut-off date. If, for example, children must be aged five years by : September in any year to start school, then children born just after that date will enter school almost a full year older than children in the same classroom with birthdays just before 1 September. The children who are among the oldest in their class have a small but significant developmental advantage over their classmates. Studies show that, as a result, they do better in many ways: their educational attainment is better, they have more friends, take on more leadership roles, and are more likely to succeed throughout life.
The paradox of modern life is quite fascinating - even in wealthy nations, though material standards have risen - better housing, technology, medicine, education etc - levels of anxiety, depression, loneliness, addiction, and social discontent are high and, in many cases, increasing. While the authors acknowledge that inequality is not the only factor affecting well-being, they argue that it is a powerful and under-recognised force. They question assumptions that economic growth automatically improves happiness, showing instead that relative position matters as much, if not more, than absolute material gain once basic needs are met. Social context matters: the more unequal a society, the more likely people are to suffer in invisible but profound ways. The authors push back on the idea that individual failings - lack of effort, moral weakness, or character flaws - are the primary drivers of these trends. And introduce the underlying reason - “status anxiety” early on. Its origins are a combination of two differing legacies - pre-human dominance ranking system (might is right) and the egalitarian period of our prehistory (resistance to dominance).
As a social species, our sensitivity to each other and ability to avoid words/behaviour that offends others were important for survival and reproductive success. We are inherently social evaluators, and our brains are tuned to assess where we stand in the social hierarchy. But, just as with stress, when it gets triggered regularly in daily life, for even people who are materially comfortable but constantly compare themselves with others to judge their worth, the psychological stress that arises is incessant. In relatively equal societies, status comparisons still occur, but the gaps are smaller and the competition less obsessive. In unequal societies, the scope of comparison widens and intensifies, people are acutely aware of who has more, who has less, who wins and who loses. Large income gaps stimulate three kinds of response - some are overcome by low self-esteem, lack of confidence and depression, others become increasingly narcissistic, and deploy various forms of self-aggrandizement to bolster their position in others' eyes. Both are responses to increased anxiety and so, both types of people are likely to fall prey to drugs, alcohol, and consumerism to improve their self presentation.
The Inner Level throws light on five important links. One, inequality makes problems with social gradients worse - health, violence, poor education rates, substance abuse etc that are seen more down the social order are 2-10x more common in unequal societies. Two, inequality affects social mixing, as social hierarchy becomes more rigid and people in different classes become even more separated from each other. Three, inequality affects social cohesion, as people not only find social contact increasingly awkward (for fear of being judged) but are also less empathetic and less keen on community and less willing to contribute to collective goods. Four, inequality increases anxieties about status. Some people respond to heightened social evaluative threats (Dominance Behavioural System, notes below), the potential downward mobility and loss of confidence through self enhancement - flaunting more, others fall to schizophrenia and other mental health issues. Five, inequality heightens consumerism and conspicuous consumption. Money becomes even more important in unequal societies, as a means to flaunt more by way of consumption.
Broadly, the mechanism is pretty obvious - when income gaps widen, social distances grow, trust erodes, and people become more focused on self-presentation and status markers. An important theme in the book is the interplay between external conditions and internal states. The authors illustrate how unequal environments shape our self-perceptions- people become more self-focused, more vigilant about threats to status, more distrustful, more inclined to see others as competitors rather than collaborators, and exhibit greater prejudice toward those perceived as lower status.This psychological shift, they suggest, fuels many contemporary problems - from the opioid epidemic in the U.S. to rising suicide rates in Japan and Scandinavia. Children growing up in such environments face particular challenges, experiencing more bullying, lower self-esteem, and reduced educational performance regardless of their family's actual income level. To note that our self perception and feelings about our social situation and circumstances can alter the expression of hundreds of genes.
Again, the authors emphasise that these psychological harms affect everyone, not just the poor. They argue that inequality isn't merely an economic issue or an individual issue but a profound public health crisis affecting our inner lives. Even wealthy individuals in unequal societies experience more anxiety and status stress than their counterparts in more equal nations. The constant need to maintain position, display success, and defend against perceived threats creates what they describe as a toxic psychological environment.
The final portion of the book is on how reducing inequality can reverse these trends. Countries that have narrowed income gaps show corresponding improvements in social trust, mental health, and community cohesion. The authors advocate for policies including progressive taxation, stronger labor protections, and employee ownership models that can create more economically democratic societies. Not as abstract economic reforms, but as investments in psychological health, social cohesion, and human dignity.
I found The Inner Level reveals connections with many books I have read in the recent past - Why Zebras don't get Ulcers, Humankind, The Worm At The Core, to name a few. Death anxiety (The Worm at the Core) connects to stress (Why Zebras don't get Ulcers) as well as status (The Inner Level). Both are survival skills that have started working against us in the modern environment. Humankind also refers back to egalitarian pre-agriculture societies because we used to apply reverse-dominance strategies to rein in those who tried to be dominant, and is optimistic about how we are fundamentally kind and can still retrieve things before it gets out of hand. The Inner Level provides a good perspective of why it is important and how we could attempt this. An important read for this age.
Notes
1. The modern rates of high mobility mean that whether we like it or not, our identity is no longer settled, maintained and confirmed by other people's lifelong knowledge of us. As a result, our sense of ourselves becomes less well anchored, more prone to ups and downs, and more at the mercy of passing moods.
2. Ascribed and achieved social class. In societies with less
3. Dominance Behavioural System - 2X2 of dominance-submission, hostile-warm creates 4 quadrants, and except for dominance-warmth, all cause mental health issues of some sort.
4. Materialism makes us unhappy. But being unhappy also makes us materialistic.
5. IQ tests measure 'habits of mind' that are cultural and learned, rather than innate.
6. Inequality actually fell between 1930 and 1970, and then started rising again.
7. How everyone understands and experiences their relatively superior or inferior position in society also differs according to whether people normally remain in the class or caste they (and often previous generations of their family) were born into, or whether their social position can change. This is the distinction between what sociologists call 'ascribed' and 'achieved social class. In societies when there is little or no social mobility, class is seen simply as an accident of birth and, although your class or caste may be seen as inferior there is little sense that you are personally culpable for your low social status: you can't be blamed for your parentage. But in societies where people are regarded as moving up or down the social ladder according to individual merit and effort, status appears much more as a reflection of personal ability or virtue, making low social status appear as a mark of individual failure.
8. The belief that modern market democracies are 'meritocratic', that class position therefore reflects ability, implies that these societies are in some sense fair: that differences in status are justified . The result is that low social status appears even more as if it were a mark of personal inadequacy and failure. It strengthens the widespread tendency to assess people's ability and intelligence on the basis of their social position, making low social status still demeaning. Nor are these tendencies confined to how we judge others. They also raise or lower people's belief in their own intelligence and ability. The belief that social status reflects personal worth starts in schools (comparison of abilities) but continues in adulthood through interviews and assessments of many different kinds.
9. All societies like to think of themselves as ones in which honest, law-abiding, hard-working citizens can make a living, contribute to society and find fulfilment. We expect our institutions - whether schools, businesses or governments - to reward moral, ethical behaviour, hard work and co-operation. However, inequality and the heightened status competition and individualism which go with it seem to contribute to a culture in which 'greed is good', risk-taking is admired, and the differences between overly dominant behaviour and leadership are elided. In such a climate, it is perhaps no wonder that individuals with a personality disorder characterised by lying, manipulation, deceit, egocentricity and callousness can often be found at the very top of modern corporate structures. Greater inequality not only causes psychopathic tendencies to manifest in more people, it provides the cut-throat environment in which those tendencies come to be seen as admirable or valuable, and competitiveness as more important than co-operation.
10. Entry into school systems is almost always determined by an annual cut-off date. If, for example, children must be aged five years by : September in any year to start school, then children born just after that date will enter school almost a full year older than children in the same classroom with birthdays just before 1 September. The children who are among the oldest in their class have a small but significant developmental advantage over their classmates. Studies show that, as a result, they do better in many ways: their educational attainment is better, they have more friends, take on more leadership roles, and are more likely to succeed throughout life.
October 9, 2018
An evidence-driven look at social gradients (income inequality) and the various negative effects in society as inequality increases. Surprisingly easy to read, and feels very important in our times. In the everyday descriptions of status anxiety and the various ways we try to claim respect from others, there's plenty to relate to.
September 30, 2019
If Capital in the Twenty-First Century is to picture the huge income and wealth gap existing in modern societies between the rich and the poor, then the current book displays the adverse implications arising for less egalitarian societies from such inequalities. The authors showcase through numerous statistical analyses the difference in performance by less egalitarian societies (e.g. the UK and the US) and their more egalitarian counterparts (e.g. Scandinavian countries or Japan) in a myriad of fields. Let it be obesity, drug addiction, depression or other mental illnesses, bullying and mobbing at school, egocentric and narcissistic behavior or social mobility, the elitist societies generally perform worse.
It is just one of the findings but I find it especially interesting that multinational corporations spend significantly higher amounts per capita on marketing and advertising in elitist societies. Consumers in more egalitarian societies turn out to be more resistant to buying luxury products at exorbitant prices because their healthy self-esteem needs no reinforcement in the form of flashy status symbols. Not coincidentally, environmental awareness and recycling are two additional areas where egalitarian societies stand out.
After the thorough and persuasive presentation of why a better quality of life is achievable in an egalitarian system, the authors make proposals about how to make the leap from elitist to egalitarian societies. Their ideas are venerable but some of them are too socialist and utopian to have a fair chance in the cold and cruel world outside. Alternatively, to feel more optimistic about their proposals one would need more faith than what I have in humankind’s collective capability of making unforced and significant mindset changes proactively.
It is just one of the findings but I find it especially interesting that multinational corporations spend significantly higher amounts per capita on marketing and advertising in elitist societies. Consumers in more egalitarian societies turn out to be more resistant to buying luxury products at exorbitant prices because their healthy self-esteem needs no reinforcement in the form of flashy status symbols. Not coincidentally, environmental awareness and recycling are two additional areas where egalitarian societies stand out.
After the thorough and persuasive presentation of why a better quality of life is achievable in an egalitarian system, the authors make proposals about how to make the leap from elitist to egalitarian societies. Their ideas are venerable but some of them are too socialist and utopian to have a fair chance in the cold and cruel world outside. Alternatively, to feel more optimistic about their proposals one would need more faith than what I have in humankind’s collective capability of making unforced and significant mindset changes proactively.
June 7, 2019
Most people think it’s a good thing when there is equal opportunity, social mobility, and a strong sense of community. Those things increase when economic inequality declines, and they decrease when the income gap widens. It’s not just a random correlation. The wider the distance between rich and everyone else, the greater the opportunity gap between the rich and the rest, the harder it is to move up the social ladder as the rungs get farther and farther apart, and the less social cohesion and trust, causing more political polarization.
Not even the current Chinese Communists believe that perfect wealth equality is a good idea. What about perfect wealth inequality, where one family owned 99 percent of the wealth? No doubt some would defend such inequality as merely the result of the free market and necessary for economic growth.
There are lots of defenders, after all, of the sharply growing wealth inequality in the USA since the 1970s. As the middleclass shrinks and wealth gets more and more concentrated, conservatives justify the status quo, and oppose measures to slow or reverse the trend while embracing policies that increase it.
This conservative premise that society benefits from more inequality is thoroughly debunked by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett in their latest book, The Inner Level. This book updates their previous book, The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger (2009), and provides a more clear explanation about the connection between inequality and health. There are compelling reasons to challenge the conservative premise, as Wilkinson and Pickett explain.
One reason that conservatives should find compelling is the shrinking of “the American dream.” The greater the inequality, the more difficult it is for people to move to the upper class; the wider the chasm, the harder it is to cross. Upward mobility is far more sluggish today than it was decades ago when there was less inequality. There is also less social mobility in the US today than in any other rich democracy, all of which have less inequality.
Research shows “that community life is weaker in societies with bigger income differences between rich and poor. Societies with smaller income gaps have repeatedly been shown to be more cohesive.” Why does growing inequality undermine community? The reason is that human beings are a social species that evolved to be extremely sensitive to social status. The authors draw upon recent insights from evolutionary psychology to explain status sensitivity. “Pre-human ranking systems have left us with an overwhelming concern for, and sensitivity to, social status.”
The wider the income inequality, the greater the social distance between us and the greater the feelings of superiority and inferiority. There is substantial evidence that a worker’s satisfaction with his or her pay significantly depends upon how it compares with other people’s pay. An unmistakable way of telling most workers they are almost worthless is to pay them a quarter of 1 percent of what someone else in the same company is paid.
As wealth concentrates, more people have anxiety about their social status. A reason for anxiety is the common belief that individuals are responsible for their social class, that the less deserving are poor while the most talented are wealthy. It is assumed that class defines self-worth. Consequently, there are rising rates of stress and mental illness.
Status anxiety weakens community. In more unequal societies, people become less trustful, less friendly, less altruistic, and are less involved in civic activities. In the USA, people have fewer close friends than a few decades ago.
Another feature of more unequal societies is a harsher attitude toward the poor, blaming them for their status, as if to justify the rising inequality. It’s worth noting that while status anxiety is higher among poor, is it higher at all income levels in more unequal countries. Anxious and depressed people often self-medicate with alcohol and other drugs, which explains why anxiety and drug abuse are bigger problems in more unequal countries.
Obesity is also higher in more unequal countries and even in more unequal states in the United States. So are the rates of homicide and of problem gambling. Child well-being is worse in more unequal rich countries, and bullying is much more common among children by a factor of almost ten than in less unequal societies. Average educational achievement reflects child well-being, and students from less unequal rich countries such as Finland and Denmark outscore their counterparts from more unequal rich countries.
On the other hand, reducing inequality reduces health and social problems. It “also dramatically improves both the psychological well-being and the quality of social relations that are essential to health and happiness.” The authors assert the link between inequality and social and health problems is well established by many studies around the world.
The invisible hand of the free market is not what causes growing inequality. On the contrary, inequality grows due to public policies such as slashing tax rates on the wealthy, weakening labor unions, and shrinking the purchasing power of social security benefits. Inequality can be reduced by reversing these policies. Unfortunately, conservatives can be counted on not only to resist any such policy changes, but to abolish the “death tax,” a policy that makes wealth more and more based upon heredity instead of merit.
How can inequality be reduced? By strengthening unions, since where unions are weaker, inequality is greater. Follow the German and EU example and require that employees be well represented on corporate boards. CEO pay rises more slowly where workers have a say in setting it. Encourage employee-owned companies and cooperatives so the benefits of ownership are more widely shared than at, say, Walmart.
Pope Francis has called inequality as “the root of social evil.” It seems clear that greater equality will benefit society, unlike more inequality. ###
Not even the current Chinese Communists believe that perfect wealth equality is a good idea. What about perfect wealth inequality, where one family owned 99 percent of the wealth? No doubt some would defend such inequality as merely the result of the free market and necessary for economic growth.
There are lots of defenders, after all, of the sharply growing wealth inequality in the USA since the 1970s. As the middleclass shrinks and wealth gets more and more concentrated, conservatives justify the status quo, and oppose measures to slow or reverse the trend while embracing policies that increase it.
This conservative premise that society benefits from more inequality is thoroughly debunked by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett in their latest book, The Inner Level. This book updates their previous book, The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger (2009), and provides a more clear explanation about the connection between inequality and health. There are compelling reasons to challenge the conservative premise, as Wilkinson and Pickett explain.
One reason that conservatives should find compelling is the shrinking of “the American dream.” The greater the inequality, the more difficult it is for people to move to the upper class; the wider the chasm, the harder it is to cross. Upward mobility is far more sluggish today than it was decades ago when there was less inequality. There is also less social mobility in the US today than in any other rich democracy, all of which have less inequality.
Research shows “that community life is weaker in societies with bigger income differences between rich and poor. Societies with smaller income gaps have repeatedly been shown to be more cohesive.” Why does growing inequality undermine community? The reason is that human beings are a social species that evolved to be extremely sensitive to social status. The authors draw upon recent insights from evolutionary psychology to explain status sensitivity. “Pre-human ranking systems have left us with an overwhelming concern for, and sensitivity to, social status.”
The wider the income inequality, the greater the social distance between us and the greater the feelings of superiority and inferiority. There is substantial evidence that a worker’s satisfaction with his or her pay significantly depends upon how it compares with other people’s pay. An unmistakable way of telling most workers they are almost worthless is to pay them a quarter of 1 percent of what someone else in the same company is paid.
As wealth concentrates, more people have anxiety about their social status. A reason for anxiety is the common belief that individuals are responsible for their social class, that the less deserving are poor while the most talented are wealthy. It is assumed that class defines self-worth. Consequently, there are rising rates of stress and mental illness.
Status anxiety weakens community. In more unequal societies, people become less trustful, less friendly, less altruistic, and are less involved in civic activities. In the USA, people have fewer close friends than a few decades ago.
Another feature of more unequal societies is a harsher attitude toward the poor, blaming them for their status, as if to justify the rising inequality. It’s worth noting that while status anxiety is higher among poor, is it higher at all income levels in more unequal countries. Anxious and depressed people often self-medicate with alcohol and other drugs, which explains why anxiety and drug abuse are bigger problems in more unequal countries.
Obesity is also higher in more unequal countries and even in more unequal states in the United States. So are the rates of homicide and of problem gambling. Child well-being is worse in more unequal rich countries, and bullying is much more common among children by a factor of almost ten than in less unequal societies. Average educational achievement reflects child well-being, and students from less unequal rich countries such as Finland and Denmark outscore their counterparts from more unequal rich countries.
On the other hand, reducing inequality reduces health and social problems. It “also dramatically improves both the psychological well-being and the quality of social relations that are essential to health and happiness.” The authors assert the link between inequality and social and health problems is well established by many studies around the world.
The invisible hand of the free market is not what causes growing inequality. On the contrary, inequality grows due to public policies such as slashing tax rates on the wealthy, weakening labor unions, and shrinking the purchasing power of social security benefits. Inequality can be reduced by reversing these policies. Unfortunately, conservatives can be counted on not only to resist any such policy changes, but to abolish the “death tax,” a policy that makes wealth more and more based upon heredity instead of merit.
How can inequality be reduced? By strengthening unions, since where unions are weaker, inequality is greater. Follow the German and EU example and require that employees be well represented on corporate boards. CEO pay rises more slowly where workers have a say in setting it. Encourage employee-owned companies and cooperatives so the benefits of ownership are more widely shared than at, say, Walmart.
Pope Francis has called inequality as “the root of social evil.” It seems clear that greater equality will benefit society, unlike more inequality. ###
September 10, 2025
An interesting compendium to The Spirit Level with what I thought to be a strong discussion on economic democracy as a means of creating more equal societies.
"As well as making real and tangible improvements to the quality of our lives, these improvements in the social functioning of our societies will put environmental sustainability within our reach. By reducing status insecurities we will reduce not only the most obvious conspicuous consumption, but also the huge volume of wasteful consumption driven more defensively by the attempts to maintain standards and avoid falling behind others. We may become more willing to repair goods instead of replacing them, and designs might facilitate that. With the decline of individualism and the strengthening of community life, we may feel less need for private cars and other forms of private provision. But above all, greater equality is likely to mean that our economic and political interests are less divergent and we find it easier to act for the common good."
"As well as making real and tangible improvements to the quality of our lives, these improvements in the social functioning of our societies will put environmental sustainability within our reach. By reducing status insecurities we will reduce not only the most obvious conspicuous consumption, but also the huge volume of wasteful consumption driven more defensively by the attempts to maintain standards and avoid falling behind others. We may become more willing to repair goods instead of replacing them, and designs might facilitate that. With the decline of individualism and the strengthening of community life, we may feel less need for private cars and other forms of private provision. But above all, greater equality is likely to mean that our economic and political interests are less divergent and we find it easier to act for the common good."
April 6, 2024
Wonderfully researched book full of interesting facts about what we don’t hear often enough- how inequality impacts everyone not just the poor! Learnt heaps! @Andrew Wear - reckon you’ll wish you wrote this one too!
May 2, 2023
Fascinating book supported by many sources. The book focusses on the personal effects of wealth inequality and how this impacts mental health. It is interesting to see that countries with a smaller income gap have so much more benefits (e.g. more cohesive/less bullying/less depression, anxiety or schizophrenia, and the list goes on) in contrast to countries like the USA where there is wider income inequality (e.g. more feelings of superiority and inferiority)
February 17, 2026
Fuck ongelijkheid en voornamelijk fuck het kapitalisme.
+ Hele concrete en interessante redenen waarom ongelijkheid slecht is voor een samenleving.
+ Er kwamen redelijk wat psychologische en sociologische fenomenen in het boek voor, hier klopte mijn hart natuurlijk sneller van.
- Soms hier en daar wat herhaling, dat was iets minder. - Ik had soms twijfels bij eventuele correlaties in tegenstelling tot uitgewezen causale verbanden.
+ Hele concrete en interessante redenen waarom ongelijkheid slecht is voor een samenleving.
+ Er kwamen redelijk wat psychologische en sociologische fenomenen in het boek voor, hier klopte mijn hart natuurlijk sneller van.
- Soms hier en daar wat herhaling, dat was iets minder. - Ik had soms twijfels bij eventuele correlaties in tegenstelling tot uitgewezen causale verbanden.
October 1, 2022
A follow on from The Spirit Level and along the same lines as Broken Ladder and What About Me. Another vital book about how the world needs to change and how inequality negatively impacts all of us.
December 14, 2019
Evidence-driven arguments on how inequality results in psychological/sociological repercussions on societies (higher likelihood of mental illnesses, social stresses, crime; lower levels of trust, lower cognition development amongst children, a weaker society fabric; greater tendency for consumerism just to quote a few). I had some questions on the methodology/quantitative methods behind the studies/stats that the book quoted - questions related to correlation/causality, statistical significance for example (do these studies use instrumental variables to determine causality? Is there a real causality argument behind the correlations or are we just finding arguments to fit the data?).
I disliked the two ending chapters which hinges on policy recommendations - Chapter 8 argues for greater environmental sustainability (erm? Am i reading on inequality or not?); Chapter 9 argues for mostly economic democracy (more employee representation to broaden the distribution of wealth) (ok, but we already have these in place and it's not sufficient), distributive policies e.g. taxes and also eliminating tax avoidance (yes, definitely) and increasing minimum wages (I would like to read more elaboration on this). Following these recommendations, the writer then states "without the reductions in inequality which these proposals aim to bring about, we may have to accept that we will be defeated by climate change", and then goes on to talk about carbon emissions - okay what's up with these random climate change statements? (I swear at this point I was ready to give this book a 3 star rating). Don't misunderstand me, I am a fervent tree hugger and I understand where Wilkinson is coming from when he argues for greater environmental consciousness/sustainability in alleviating the side effects of inequality manifested as greater consumerism/status insecurity, but this only alleviates the repercussions and not tackle the root causes of inequality per say.
Overall, the book had a strong start but ended off less strongly with its unfocused policy recommendations (that being said, inequality is a hard issue to resolve so props to the writers' attempt with their recommendations). The first 7 chapters were much more enjoyable reads. 4 stars just because I am quite impressed with some of the interesting findings and can tell that the book is very well researched.
To end off: "A more equal society would enjoy better physical and mental health, higher standards of child well-being, less violence, fewer people in prison, less drug addiction and more equal opportunities for children. A more equal society is conducive to the psychological well-being of whole populations."
I disliked the two ending chapters which hinges on policy recommendations - Chapter 8 argues for greater environmental sustainability (erm? Am i reading on inequality or not?); Chapter 9 argues for mostly economic democracy (more employee representation to broaden the distribution of wealth) (ok, but we already have these in place and it's not sufficient), distributive policies e.g. taxes and also eliminating tax avoidance (yes, definitely) and increasing minimum wages (I would like to read more elaboration on this). Following these recommendations, the writer then states "without the reductions in inequality which these proposals aim to bring about, we may have to accept that we will be defeated by climate change", and then goes on to talk about carbon emissions - okay what's up with these random climate change statements? (I swear at this point I was ready to give this book a 3 star rating). Don't misunderstand me, I am a fervent tree hugger and I understand where Wilkinson is coming from when he argues for greater environmental consciousness/sustainability in alleviating the side effects of inequality manifested as greater consumerism/status insecurity, but this only alleviates the repercussions and not tackle the root causes of inequality per say.
Overall, the book had a strong start but ended off less strongly with its unfocused policy recommendations (that being said, inequality is a hard issue to resolve so props to the writers' attempt with their recommendations). The first 7 chapters were much more enjoyable reads. 4 stars just because I am quite impressed with some of the interesting findings and can tell that the book is very well researched.
To end off: "A more equal society would enjoy better physical and mental health, higher standards of child well-being, less violence, fewer people in prison, less drug addiction and more equal opportunities for children. A more equal society is conducive to the psychological well-being of whole populations."
Read
April 4, 2020Wealth inequality and what it does for countries. More inequality more disease, crime, and poor health, poor education, poor jobs.
in the USA the largest income differences between rich and suffers from the highest homicide rates, the highest percentage of the population in prison, the highest rates of mental illness, the highest teenage birth rates, among the lowest life expectancy, low levels of child well being and low maths and literacy attainment. p. 2
. . . greater inequality damages societies, harming human health and well-being. p. 3
. . . inequality affects the vast majority of the population. .. . p. 6
We also see endless signs of the desire for the trappings of status behind which people try to hide their insecurity. p. 11
. . . unravel the processes of dominance and subordination that are central to all such experiences of inequality. ** common vulnerability . . . p. 12
. . . there is a clear relationship between income inequality and higher rates of depression. p. 61
. . . people in more unequal countries felt they had less control over their lives. p. 64
. . . struggling to keep up also seems to make us less compassionate towards others. p. 63
People living in less equal US states had significantly lower levels of Agreeableness than those living in more equal states. p. 65
Donald Trump performed more strongly in states with high income inequality. p. 66
. . . bigger swing in the vote towards Donald Trump in counties with worse health. p. 67
. . . health is worse in more unequal societies. p. 69
Damian Thompson book The Fix describes the ways in which we're increasingly obsessed by our mobile phones, sugary cupcakes, video games, frozen coffee drinks and online shopping. . 101
. . . buying things, particularly status goods, is also shaped by the status anxiety and the intense competition fuelled by income inequality. p. 105
Second rate goods are seen as marking out second-rate people. p. 107
Harry Wallop argues that how we spend our money as has become a more important indicator or social class than how we earn it. . . . p. 108
Pierre Bourdieu . . . it is the possessors of 'cultural capital', those with education and other social assets, who determine what good taste is in any society at any time. p. 109
. . . they escape their low status back home * * * . . . their choices, behavior and spending are shaped by commercial interests and pressures. p. 110
. . . you can only have fun if you spend more. p. 111
. . . Danes; their greater equality of income, as well as greater equality between men and women, means that they are less susceptible to advertising. . . . p. 112
. . . Aspiration Index. . . . p. 114
How have we evolved into creatures so sensitive to status that in some circumstances we'll pursue it to our own detriment? In the next chapter we examine how it is that status can matter so much, and why other people's judgements of us affect us so deeply. p. 118
. . . bullying is much more common among children in more unequal societies. p. 139
. . . there is evidence that rates of child maltreatment are higher in the most unequal states of the USA. p. 146
EU defines poverty as living on less than 60 percent of the median income in each country. * * * relative deprivation. . . p. 148
No parent was able to escape the shame of failing to provide for their children even when children were prepared to stop asking for things -- the latter itself being a further source of shame. p. 149
. . . as many as 16% of our species have an IQ below 85 * * * Social Mobility is reduced where income inequality is greatest. p. 161
. . . the cognitive damage that living in poverty does to children. p. 172
. . . it is clear that differences in cognitive development and intelligence are the consequence of inequality rather than its cause. p. 175
. . . about 30 per cent of all American children live in relative poverty. p. 191
Inequality, like poverty, creates intergenerational cycles of disadvantage, and wastes vast swathes of human capabilities, talents and potential. p. 193
. . . for people in rich countries, having more and more of everything makes less and less difference * * * . . . having more clearly make least difference to those who have more. * * *
. . . Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) * * * . . . economic well-being has ceased to increase with economic gain. p. 227
. . . everyone's desire for a higher income continues to be driven by status competition, although it no longer serves the overall well-being of the population and causes significant damage to the environment. p. 228
. . . as continued innovation raises productivity, we must use it to increase time devoted to leisure rather than consumption. * * * . . . as automation and artificial intelligence replace many forms of employment, it is crucial that this change is used to increase leisure for everyone, rather than increse unemployment for a growing minority. p. 229 !!!!!!
. . . consumerism is driven by status insecurity. * * * To reduce consumerism, and the damage it does to our wallets and world, the inequality which intensifies status competition must be reduced. p.236 !!!!!!!
Few things are as damaging to the real quality of our lives as the effect of high levels of inequality on social relationships. p. 238
We now know how to reduce the power of class and status. Whole societies could be liberated from a hierarchical social structure that encourages people at each level in the status hierarchy to exclude those below them. Much of the nastiness which feeds social anxiety and lack of confidence could be brought to an end so that social life could regenerate. p. 245 !!!!!
An IMF research report finds not only that inequality is bad for growth (as we pointed out in Chapter 6), but also that redistribution is not damaging to growth. p 249
. . . Obama called inequality 'the defining challenge of our times" p. 252
. . . the tendency for the incomes (before taxes) of the wealthiest to increase much more rapidly than everyone else's . * * * . . . widening differences in personal worth and ability, as well as in an increase in hubris and sense of entitlement among those at the top. p. 253 !!!!!
. . . employers only employ people if they think the value of thier work is greater than the amount they are paid. p 256 !!!!!!!
Germany . . . found that employee representation increases company efficiency . . . . p. 257
But when political leaders of even progressive political parties get too close to the very wealthy, that notion is lost -- and voters can start to believe that people as wealthy as President Trump will somehow serve the interests of the least well off. p. 265 ++++++
. . . the largest employee-owned company in the USA is Publix Super Markets. . . p 266
four key improvements in the quality of life First, through great equality, we gain a world where status matters less. . . . p. 271 we move toward a more relaxes social life..
Second, We move from a society that maximizes consumption and status, to a society that uses each increase in productivity to gin more leiusre and reduce the demands of work.
Third is the improvement in the quality of working life resulting fromt eh extension of democracy into employment. p. 272
Fourth are all the health and social benefits of living in a more equal society. p. 273 * * * A more equal society is conducive to the psychosocial well-being of whole populations. p. 273
in the USA the largest income differences between rich and suffers from the highest homicide rates, the highest percentage of the population in prison, the highest rates of mental illness, the highest teenage birth rates, among the lowest life expectancy, low levels of child well being and low maths and literacy attainment. p. 2
. . . greater inequality damages societies, harming human health and well-being. p. 3
. . . inequality affects the vast majority of the population. .. . p. 6
We also see endless signs of the desire for the trappings of status behind which people try to hide their insecurity. p. 11
. . . unravel the processes of dominance and subordination that are central to all such experiences of inequality. ** common vulnerability . . . p. 12
. . . there is a clear relationship between income inequality and higher rates of depression. p. 61
. . . people in more unequal countries felt they had less control over their lives. p. 64
. . . struggling to keep up also seems to make us less compassionate towards others. p. 63
People living in less equal US states had significantly lower levels of Agreeableness than those living in more equal states. p. 65
Donald Trump performed more strongly in states with high income inequality. p. 66
. . . bigger swing in the vote towards Donald Trump in counties with worse health. p. 67
. . . health is worse in more unequal societies. p. 69
Damian Thompson book The Fix describes the ways in which we're increasingly obsessed by our mobile phones, sugary cupcakes, video games, frozen coffee drinks and online shopping. . 101
. . . buying things, particularly status goods, is also shaped by the status anxiety and the intense competition fuelled by income inequality. p. 105
Second rate goods are seen as marking out second-rate people. p. 107
Harry Wallop argues that how we spend our money as has become a more important indicator or social class than how we earn it. . . . p. 108
Pierre Bourdieu . . . it is the possessors of 'cultural capital', those with education and other social assets, who determine what good taste is in any society at any time. p. 109
. . . they escape their low status back home * * * . . . their choices, behavior and spending are shaped by commercial interests and pressures. p. 110
. . . you can only have fun if you spend more. p. 111
. . . Danes; their greater equality of income, as well as greater equality between men and women, means that they are less susceptible to advertising. . . . p. 112
. . . Aspiration Index. . . . p. 114
How have we evolved into creatures so sensitive to status that in some circumstances we'll pursue it to our own detriment? In the next chapter we examine how it is that status can matter so much, and why other people's judgements of us affect us so deeply. p. 118
. . . bullying is much more common among children in more unequal societies. p. 139
. . . there is evidence that rates of child maltreatment are higher in the most unequal states of the USA. p. 146
EU defines poverty as living on less than 60 percent of the median income in each country. * * * relative deprivation. . . p. 148
No parent was able to escape the shame of failing to provide for their children even when children were prepared to stop asking for things -- the latter itself being a further source of shame. p. 149
. . . as many as 16% of our species have an IQ below 85 * * * Social Mobility is reduced where income inequality is greatest. p. 161
. . . the cognitive damage that living in poverty does to children. p. 172
. . . it is clear that differences in cognitive development and intelligence are the consequence of inequality rather than its cause. p. 175
. . . about 30 per cent of all American children live in relative poverty. p. 191
Inequality, like poverty, creates intergenerational cycles of disadvantage, and wastes vast swathes of human capabilities, talents and potential. p. 193
. . . for people in rich countries, having more and more of everything makes less and less difference * * * . . . having more clearly make least difference to those who have more. * * *
. . . Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) * * * . . . economic well-being has ceased to increase with economic gain. p. 227
. . . everyone's desire for a higher income continues to be driven by status competition, although it no longer serves the overall well-being of the population and causes significant damage to the environment. p. 228
. . . as continued innovation raises productivity, we must use it to increase time devoted to leisure rather than consumption. * * * . . . as automation and artificial intelligence replace many forms of employment, it is crucial that this change is used to increase leisure for everyone, rather than increse unemployment for a growing minority. p. 229 !!!!!!
. . . consumerism is driven by status insecurity. * * * To reduce consumerism, and the damage it does to our wallets and world, the inequality which intensifies status competition must be reduced. p.236 !!!!!!!
Few things are as damaging to the real quality of our lives as the effect of high levels of inequality on social relationships. p. 238
We now know how to reduce the power of class and status. Whole societies could be liberated from a hierarchical social structure that encourages people at each level in the status hierarchy to exclude those below them. Much of the nastiness which feeds social anxiety and lack of confidence could be brought to an end so that social life could regenerate. p. 245 !!!!!
An IMF research report finds not only that inequality is bad for growth (as we pointed out in Chapter 6), but also that redistribution is not damaging to growth. p 249
. . . Obama called inequality 'the defining challenge of our times" p. 252
. . . the tendency for the incomes (before taxes) of the wealthiest to increase much more rapidly than everyone else's . * * * . . . widening differences in personal worth and ability, as well as in an increase in hubris and sense of entitlement among those at the top. p. 253 !!!!!
. . . employers only employ people if they think the value of thier work is greater than the amount they are paid. p 256 !!!!!!!
Germany . . . found that employee representation increases company efficiency . . . . p. 257
But when political leaders of even progressive political parties get too close to the very wealthy, that notion is lost -- and voters can start to believe that people as wealthy as President Trump will somehow serve the interests of the least well off. p. 265 ++++++
. . . the largest employee-owned company in the USA is Publix Super Markets. . . p 266
four key improvements in the quality of life First, through great equality, we gain a world where status matters less. . . . p. 271 we move toward a more relaxes social life..
Second, We move from a society that maximizes consumption and status, to a society that uses each increase in productivity to gin more leiusre and reduce the demands of work.
Third is the improvement in the quality of working life resulting fromt eh extension of democracy into employment. p. 272
Fourth are all the health and social benefits of living in a more equal society. p. 273 * * * A more equal society is conducive to the psychosocial well-being of whole populations. p. 273
February 5, 2020
Wilkinson and Pickett have done it again! Another triumph of clear written scholarship of a very high standard. In this book the authors take the findings of The Spirit Level deeper - within us - looking at the psychological effects and stresses themselves. Readers (and no doubt critics) may find this harder to take: it is, after all, (for readers) difficult to accept that our inner states and outer behaviours are materialistically conditioned in the way analysed, while (for critics) it may look like personal weakness and bleeding hearts.
While I was reading this book I was repeatedly reminded of the Prime Minister's ludicrous attempt at being serious (back in 2013) in a speech where he offered an off-top-of-the-head dinner-party diagnosis of rising inequality - the famous "cornflake" moment (cornflakes for Boris must not be forgotten - this is his equivalent of Thatcher's "society" moment, which she never shook off). Wonderfully, at the beginning of Chapter 6 (p. 151) the authors themselves tell the story. Now that he is Prime Minister - more than ever - this kind of nonsense needs to be challenged at every moment. It's not just his hubris and lack of self awareness regarding what are empirical claims (that are demonstrably false) - it's the fact that, like Thatcher's "no such thing as society", the empirical status is in the end beside the point, because the statements end up operating entirely normatively. That is, they will condition policy.
And policy is also covered in this book - Part 3 provides excellent suggestions for ways forward, based on the investigations and diagnostics that precede it.
First rate.
While I was reading this book I was repeatedly reminded of the Prime Minister's ludicrous attempt at being serious (back in 2013) in a speech where he offered an off-top-of-the-head dinner-party diagnosis of rising inequality - the famous "cornflake" moment (cornflakes for Boris must not be forgotten - this is his equivalent of Thatcher's "society" moment, which she never shook off). Wonderfully, at the beginning of Chapter 6 (p. 151) the authors themselves tell the story. Now that he is Prime Minister - more than ever - this kind of nonsense needs to be challenged at every moment. It's not just his hubris and lack of self awareness regarding what are empirical claims (that are demonstrably false) - it's the fact that, like Thatcher's "no such thing as society", the empirical status is in the end beside the point, because the statements end up operating entirely normatively. That is, they will condition policy.
And policy is also covered in this book - Part 3 provides excellent suggestions for ways forward, based on the investigations and diagnostics that precede it.
First rate.
June 10, 2021
First book I've read on the topic (explicitly) although it converges many issues that originate from inequality, such as mental health, status insecurity and anxiety, violence and crime, overconsumption/consumerism (to soothe status anxiety), and even touches on meritocracy and wealth hoarding. A very broad book on the topic. Its not too technical or dry- lots of graphs to support their points- with data mainly from US, UK, and other European countries.
When I was finishing this I picked up The Price of Inequality by Joseph E. Stiglitz, and another book on my current pile related to this is The Sum of US by Heather McGhee (on Zero Sum Theory, which is the main ideology in US that is a massive barrier to funding and supporting a strong infrastructure of Public Goods- which drastically reduce inequality)
When I was finishing this I picked up The Price of Inequality by Joseph E. Stiglitz, and another book on my current pile related to this is The Sum of US by Heather McGhee (on Zero Sum Theory, which is the main ideology in US that is a massive barrier to funding and supporting a strong infrastructure of Public Goods- which drastically reduce inequality)
September 20, 2019
Besides my skeptism of some of the by-country data (how accurate the claims match reality) and over idealistic visions, the biggest struggle is with the writing. Very repetitive while not very organized in a logical order, with examples and data sometimes almost randomly thrown in. It feels like something some professor lectures in a classroom that you need to try really hard to concentrate on, and the points could have been made with maybe just 1/3 of the volume. Almost gave up several times and had to force myself to finish.
October 4, 2018
sdfadasdfasdf
April 2, 2023
Back in 2014 I completed a honours BA in Psychology primarily to learn about wellbeing and education, and spent countless hours going over the kind of research (including much of the same research) covered in this book. I enjoyed my studies, excelled in them, and was recruited for graduate studies. I left the field of psychology, however, not because the answers were unsatisfactory but because the questions were. My pursuit of answers via psychology had mistaken questions of ethics and politics for questions of technocratic pragmatics. The questions of whether or not working class people should have say in how their labour is used, should get something resembling the wealth they produce, should have decent public benefits, etc. simply don't come down to whether or not research suggests there will health benefits that are economically useful in the long run. What if it turned out healthcare was a cost rather than a strong economic investment? What if democracy produced less economic growth than dictatorship? It hardly follows that we should support dictatorship and leave the poor to rot if they get sick.
And so I opened this book very skeptically, and read it containing any enthusiasm.
While the book overall is strong, the concluding chapter was what blew me away. I expected the authors to simply prescribe tax brackets based on evidence that more equality is healthier. Instead they spent a great deal of time going through the under-considered success of employee-owned companies, which are actually more productive than standard enterprise and popular across the political spectrum. Cooperatives likewise receive a great deal of attention, and they examine the remarkable worker cooperatives of Mondragon in Spain. They pay attention to process, and identify the expansion of democracy into the world of the workplace as the next big development for human civilization. Ultimately they compile a practical and principled political economy, one that remains in keeping with the research on equality but is not reducible to it.
This is very good book indeed.
And so I opened this book very skeptically, and read it containing any enthusiasm.
While the book overall is strong, the concluding chapter was what blew me away. I expected the authors to simply prescribe tax brackets based on evidence that more equality is healthier. Instead they spent a great deal of time going through the under-considered success of employee-owned companies, which are actually more productive than standard enterprise and popular across the political spectrum. Cooperatives likewise receive a great deal of attention, and they examine the remarkable worker cooperatives of Mondragon in Spain. They pay attention to process, and identify the expansion of democracy into the world of the workplace as the next big development for human civilization. Ultimately they compile a practical and principled political economy, one that remains in keeping with the research on equality but is not reducible to it.
This is very good book indeed.
August 19, 2022
“Oggi è comprovato che le correlazioni tra disuguaglianza dei redditi e problemi sia sociali sia sanitari devono essere considerate di causa-effetto, e rispecchiano i meccanismi con cui una maggiore disparità danneggia la società, la salute e il benessere delle persone.” Richard Wilkinson.
Mi sono rimaste due domande riguardanti la disuguaglianza che purtroppo in questo libro non hanno trovato risposta:
La disuguaglianza dei redditi e di status causa problemi sociali e sanitari?
Il libro è pieno di diagrammi che mettono in relazione il livello di disuguaglianza dei vari paesi (asse delle ascisse) con il numero di malattie mentali, riduzione della coesione sociale e della fiducia in noi stessi, aumento della segregazione, tendenza al bullismo tra i bambini, più egoismo e meno importanza al bene comune, diffusione della sociofobia (asse delle ordinate).
Questi diagrammi dimostrano in modo efficace che esiste una CORRELAZIONE tra la disuguaglianza dei redditi e i problemi elencati sopra, ma non dimostrano però l’elemento CAUSA-EFFETTO.
Ad esempio, è la disuguaglianza che ci porta ad essere sempre più ossessionati del nostro status sociale e del bisogno di scalare la piramide sociale oppure è viceversa? Sinceramente a me non è ancora chiaro.
I problemi correlati alla disuguaglianza colpiscono tutti oppure solo la parte più povera della società?
Il libro afferma che i problemi legati alla disuguaglianza affliggono tutti. Entrando però in dettaglio nei vari capitoli, emerge che in realtà i problemi sono “a gradiente sociale”, cioè chi sta sul fondo è più colpito di chi sta in cima della piramide sociale. Ad esempio, sulla violenza l’autore ammette che “l’aumento della violenza riscontrato nelle società più disuguali non è causato dai poveri che assaltano i ricchi ma principalmente da un aumento della violenza tra chi sta sul fondo.” E ancora, riguardo alla prestazione scolastica dei ragazzi, “il rapporto tra disuguaglianza reddituale ed esiti scolastici abbraccia tutto lo spettro economico, peggiorando la performance di un gran numero di bambini…le differenze nei risultati scolastici sono però nette in fondo alla scala sociale.”
Concordo con l’autore sul fatto che “la competizione per lo status è un gioco a somma zero, non possiamo tutti migliorare il nostro status rispetto a tutti gli altri. Se alcuni ci guadagnano, altri ci rimettono.” Ma sono convinto che possiamo migliorare la condizione di chi sta peggio di noi senza che nessuno ci rimetta.
Credo che il fenomeno della disuguaglianza non sia la causa dei problemi menzionati nel libro, ma piuttosto una conseguenza di fenomeni socio-economici complessi. Più che puntare il dito sul problema della disuguaglianza dovremmo investigare le cause a monte che hanno portato le nostre società ad essere così disuguali.
Penso leggerò anche La misura dell'anima. Perché le disuguaglianze rendono le società più infelici dello stesso autore per cercare risposte convincenti alle due domande che mi sono posto.
Mi sono rimaste due domande riguardanti la disuguaglianza che purtroppo in questo libro non hanno trovato risposta:
La disuguaglianza dei redditi e di status causa problemi sociali e sanitari?
Il libro è pieno di diagrammi che mettono in relazione il livello di disuguaglianza dei vari paesi (asse delle ascisse) con il numero di malattie mentali, riduzione della coesione sociale e della fiducia in noi stessi, aumento della segregazione, tendenza al bullismo tra i bambini, più egoismo e meno importanza al bene comune, diffusione della sociofobia (asse delle ordinate).
Questi diagrammi dimostrano in modo efficace che esiste una CORRELAZIONE tra la disuguaglianza dei redditi e i problemi elencati sopra, ma non dimostrano però l’elemento CAUSA-EFFETTO.
Ad esempio, è la disuguaglianza che ci porta ad essere sempre più ossessionati del nostro status sociale e del bisogno di scalare la piramide sociale oppure è viceversa? Sinceramente a me non è ancora chiaro.
I problemi correlati alla disuguaglianza colpiscono tutti oppure solo la parte più povera della società?
Il libro afferma che i problemi legati alla disuguaglianza affliggono tutti. Entrando però in dettaglio nei vari capitoli, emerge che in realtà i problemi sono “a gradiente sociale”, cioè chi sta sul fondo è più colpito di chi sta in cima della piramide sociale. Ad esempio, sulla violenza l’autore ammette che “l’aumento della violenza riscontrato nelle società più disuguali non è causato dai poveri che assaltano i ricchi ma principalmente da un aumento della violenza tra chi sta sul fondo.” E ancora, riguardo alla prestazione scolastica dei ragazzi, “il rapporto tra disuguaglianza reddituale ed esiti scolastici abbraccia tutto lo spettro economico, peggiorando la performance di un gran numero di bambini…le differenze nei risultati scolastici sono però nette in fondo alla scala sociale.”
Concordo con l’autore sul fatto che “la competizione per lo status è un gioco a somma zero, non possiamo tutti migliorare il nostro status rispetto a tutti gli altri. Se alcuni ci guadagnano, altri ci rimettono.” Ma sono convinto che possiamo migliorare la condizione di chi sta peggio di noi senza che nessuno ci rimetta.
Credo che il fenomeno della disuguaglianza non sia la causa dei problemi menzionati nel libro, ma piuttosto una conseguenza di fenomeni socio-economici complessi. Più che puntare il dito sul problema della disuguaglianza dovremmo investigare le cause a monte che hanno portato le nostre società ad essere così disuguali.
Penso leggerò anche La misura dell'anima. Perché le disuguaglianze rendono le società più infelici dello stesso autore per cercare risposte convincenti alle due domande che mi sono posto.
November 14, 2018
A pleasant, well-thought book.
In a sense, it's normal that inequalities trigger all sort of problems like jealousy, more violence, imprisonment, and lack of trust.
Our world is moving toward more connectivity and wholeness. Our consciousness understands that we are not fragmented: we need each other to succeed. Humanity cannot thrive and leave people behind.
At the same time, inequalities always existed and it seems it always will. Inequality is the tension and the force we need to move forward. Without it, we would just stagnate. (I didn't see the author taking this option into account)
Isn't it paradoxical that we all experience social fear of being stupid in front of others? If we all do, we shouldn't do?
Lots of reports and statistics are illustrated throughout the book.
In a sense, it's normal that inequalities trigger all sort of problems like jealousy, more violence, imprisonment, and lack of trust.
Our world is moving toward more connectivity and wholeness. Our consciousness understands that we are not fragmented: we need each other to succeed. Humanity cannot thrive and leave people behind.
At the same time, inequalities always existed and it seems it always will. Inequality is the tension and the force we need to move forward. Without it, we would just stagnate. (I didn't see the author taking this option into account)
Isn't it paradoxical that we all experience social fear of being stupid in front of others? If we all do, we shouldn't do?
"We treat our shyness, self-doubt and frequent inability to feel at ease with others as if they were purely personal psychological weaknesses, as if they were flaws built into our emotional make-up that we must cope with on our own as best we can.
Because we tend to hide these insecurities from each other, we fail to see them in others."
Lots of reports and statistics are illustrated throughout the book.
January 15, 2022
Tenía ganas de leer este ensayo sobre las horrendas consecuencias que provoca la desigualdad de ingresos.
Con un firme compendio de estudios científicos, achacan a este factor graves problemas sociosanitarios, en #SaludMental, educación, ratio de presos...
Me gusta el enfoque casi aséptico respecto a ideologías y sus mareos.
Se centran en mostrar las causas y consecuencias de la desigualdad, y cómo las pruebas dicen que una sociedad mas igualitaria nos hace vivir de manera equilibrada a todos, mejorando el bienestar general.
Dedican un capítulo a desterrar el mito de la meritocracia desde el punto de vista genético y antropológico, demostrando que de los 300 mil años que lleva el ser humano en la tierra, casi el 95% del tiempo ha vivido en sociedades igualitarias, sin privilegios por nacimiento.
Muy interesantes los estudios que relacionan ingresos con empatia, la ansiedad por el estatus donde vivimos y el límite de bienestar que alcanzaron los países ricos hace decadas.
Finalizan con consejos para paliar esta desigualdad que daña a pobres y ricos.
Muy recomendable.
Con un firme compendio de estudios científicos, achacan a este factor graves problemas sociosanitarios, en #SaludMental, educación, ratio de presos...
Me gusta el enfoque casi aséptico respecto a ideologías y sus mareos.
Se centran en mostrar las causas y consecuencias de la desigualdad, y cómo las pruebas dicen que una sociedad mas igualitaria nos hace vivir de manera equilibrada a todos, mejorando el bienestar general.
Dedican un capítulo a desterrar el mito de la meritocracia desde el punto de vista genético y antropológico, demostrando que de los 300 mil años que lleva el ser humano en la tierra, casi el 95% del tiempo ha vivido en sociedades igualitarias, sin privilegios por nacimiento.
Muy interesantes los estudios que relacionan ingresos con empatia, la ansiedad por el estatus donde vivimos y el límite de bienestar que alcanzaron los países ricos hace decadas.
Finalizan con consejos para paliar esta desigualdad que daña a pobres y ricos.
Muy recomendable.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 85 reviews