Many people believe that the best way to produce a happier society is to ensure that there are only small differences in earning between the richest and the poorest members. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Building the well-being of society has been one of the significant topics on the agenda of governments. Some people believe that the optimum option is to foster income equality to prevent social gaps. While this proposal is theoretically valid, it could be counterproductive; and taxation could prove a much more comprehensive tool.
Proponents of equitable income distribution argue that if every person in our society earned similar levels of income, there would be less less envy, which is relatively common if a person finds another person more successful than he is. This elimination of income gaps should result in more happiness as people are not required to face constant competition to climb the social ladder to enhance their status or overtake others on their career path, which means they do not have to withstand the pressure of exhausting deadlines to meet social expectations. In their view, less envy and stress could greatly improve one’s sense of well-being, the foundation for happiness.
However, while income equality might reduce envy and stress, it stifles competition, widely regarded as the key for innovation and development, which bring us great convenience and comfort. Since antiquity, a large number of advancements have been made owing to people’s desire to earn their livelihood and accumulate wealth, from the horse carriages for trade, steam engines for mass-production, to alternating current for energy. Had humankind earned the same amounts however hard they worked, it would have been unlikely for such development to be achieved since the patrons and the inventors would have found no incentive to pursue such projects. Considering that labor-saving devices and machinery were created from these commercialized ideas, a society promoting income equality is unlikely to relieve our burden and offer as much happiness to people, as our lives would still revolve around sustenance farming and agriculture.
Therefore, taxation could prove a much more effective tool to ensure the happiness of our society as it could still drive growth and development. Income tax revenues, which are allocated to public services and social welfare, could redistribute the wealth of the country to the deprived with universal healthcare and education systems, funds for poverty eradication programs, while still upholding the competition mentality between members of the upper echelons as they can earn more desirable incomes if they fully dedicate their work to quality products and services. In this way, the poor can enjoy more support and expanded opportunities, while the rich feel less mistreated when incomes are roughly the same for everyone, thus guaranteeing less societal tension and deserved remuneration for dedicated members of society.
To conclude, while income equality is seemingly sound for a happier society, I do not agree with it since it stifles competition and development. A more optimal proposal is to employ taxation to reallocate the national wealth for the common prosperity as overall, this balanced strategy could foster long-term societal contentment and sustainable development.
