There are many relationships. There is a food chain that connects animals to other animals and plants. There will be a society relationship between animals that have brains, such as monkeys and dogs. Society was established by humans long ago. Furthermore, humanity realized that equality was essential for a strong society. People never cease to strive for equity. People used to seek human rights, racial equity, and other freedoms in the past. People now realize that inequality exists between the rich and the poor, which is called equity of wealth. David Leonhardt’s article, “Inequality Is Not Inevitable… But It Has Been There Forever” stated a similar conclusion. In other words, the world will end up having 99% of wealth and 1% of wealth.

David Leonhardt shares his view of the current wealth situation in “Inequality has been going on for forever… but that doesn’t mean it’s inevitable”. He quoted Thomas Piketty as saying “Inequality is rising throughout modern history”; however, it is legal and moral to work to increase one’s assets. This inequality is increasing. Yes, more money does not necessarily mean more ability. A person could spend 10 dollars for lunch. Who is this person going to meet? Or, if they can spend 100 on one meal. This pattern can be applied to any situation. Many people want to be wealthy. Wealthy people with large sums of money might not have the same pleasure as rich friends and family. But, there are some benefits to affluence. You may not need to worry about housing if you have the money to buy a home that suits your needs. You have many options when it comes to buying cars, furniture, food, and funding your university education. It is the opposite for those who are poor. It is hard for the poor to survive. They have to struggle each day to make ends meet. Some people may consider it a necessity, but you often need to do it. Many people believe that being broke is very harmful and does not have any advantage. It’s clear from the above that many people think being poor is bad. David’s article focuses on the fact that despite the fact that equity is falling and the gap between current and future condition is increasing, he believes that people can “alter the course to inequality.” The world has changed significantly and people have seen many changes. It isn’t true that you can do the same things as before. It is impossible to be wealthy in the future. Even if everyone can consume at the level of wealthy people today, there will always be things that are not possible to pay for. It is impossible to be rich if everyone is the same income. All people will be equal in income or wealth. You could argue that equality and inequalities are meaningless if all people have the same income or wealth level. How can we distinguish between the wealthy and the poor? How can people recognize the rich when everyone is extremely wealthy? However, this could mean that the majority of people today are very wealthy. This means that people’s standard is much higher today than it was 1000 years ago. Nearly everyone can find a magic tool that suits them. Even the wealthiest middle-class people didn’t have such a tool. The future situation will not be what David said, “To say something has a chance, or is natural, does not necessarily mean that it is going to happen.”

Take a look back to see if we can assume people will get richer in the future. It is still impossible, so long capitalism and the political system which benefits the majority of the world continue to rule the mainstream. Thomas Piketty, an economist from France who is known for his research on income inequality between the rich & the poor. He is also the Director of Education at the Higher School of Social Sciences. “Inequality is a feature of much modern history,” he wrote. David had also used his words. David had reached out to Thomas to ask about the question. However, he was unable complete it.

Piketty pointed out the fact that current wealth inequality would lead to more extreme and potentially dangerous consequences for capitalism’s future. Capitalism is dependent on wealth inequality. This centralist argument is used to stimulate risk and effort. The government must stop taxing wealth, capital and inheritance to kill the goose that lays golden eggs. Piketty studied 200 years of data and proved them wrong. Piketty believes capital blind. Capital stocks will increase at an disproportionate rate if their return (investment in buying and selling real property to build new factories) exceeds actual wages and output.

Inequality in wealth has increased exponentially. This inequality has grown exponentially due to inheritance. The United States and United Kingdom have seen it worsen with the rise of luxury “supermanagers”. Piketty writes executive compensation has no relationship to real value. Japan, for example, has much lower pay. Instead, it is an Anglo-Saxon social norm that has been allowed by the ideology known as “elite extremeism”, which is essentially a selfish, greedy desire to keep up in line with other wealthy people. This is an important aspect of Piketty’s thinking. Wealth inequality isn’t static. It can be embraced or challenged by society.

The income inequality is nearly twice the level of inequalities in Europe and America. The top 10% account for 60% to 70 percent of all wealth while only 25% to 35% make up the remainder. This concentration of wealth has existed since the end of the 19th century, when some people wanted to inherit the most important factors in economic or social life. Wealth and income interact in a constant way. In the end, enormous wealth leads to increased rental income and income that is not realized, which further exacerbates inequality. But other forces have joined the fray to destroy capitalism’s vitality. Piketty argued that the rich effectively tax their wealth, while gradually increasing the tax burden on middle-income people. The UK’s highest income tax payment is at 1%. However, income tax accounts for only 25% of all taxes. 45% of all taxes are VAT, GST, and National Insurance. Taxpayers are not able to pay for the public goods that ordinary taxpayers need, such as housing, education, and health care. Wealth inequality has resulted in a slowing of innovation, innovating aversions, worsening economic conditions, more difficult work conditions and degrading services. The rich are becoming less connected to society as a result. This is not due merit or hardwork. It is simply because they have more return on their capital than their wages.

In conclusion: No matter what happens in future, rich people are going to continue getting richer, while the poor will remain poor. While wealth is increasing in the hands of the poor, there is no way to know how much. Simon Kuznets argued in “Economic Gain and Income Inequality” that the paper was merely 5% empirical information, and 95% speculation. This means that articles which claim to be able to predict aren’t as reliable and accurate. No one wants to be wealthy, but the world is not run on their will.