Income Inequality is a Non Sequitur

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.