Income inequality is a non
sequitur in a free society with free markets because the very premise of income
inequality is fallacious. For example, the surface area of the Earth is
about 70% water but does this mean there is land inequality on the planet?
In a
free and capitalistic system, income inequality is irrelevant because the
intrinsic nature of freedom and capitalism is unequal outcomes. If the
dialogue changes toward policies that attack income gaps then a change in the
political structure must follow to reduce liberty and capitalism to move to
tyranny and collectivism. In
a free market, if a man owns a landscaping company and earns $1 million where
the man who pushes the lawnmower gets $8/hour, is this income
inequality an issue? No, if the lawnmower man is free to open his
own landscape business. If the lawnmower guy cannot start a business
because of government impediments then that’s a problem. But if he
doesn’t start it because he doesn’t want to then that is, as Milton
Friedman said, the freedom to choose.
Government
intervention to narrow income inequality is a banner upon which government can
gain more power at the expense of our liberty. The better
discussion should be to remove impediments to equal opportunity
and free markets.
