What is inequality?

In order to strengthen his "capability approach" (58) and better outline those factors that influence one's capabilities, Sen focuses on instances of poverty, and in accordance with his approach claims that it "must be seen as the deprivation of basic capabilities rather than merely lowness of incomes" (87). He insists that poverty represents much more than a mere inequality of income between individuals, and that "the instrumental relation between low income and low capability" not only exists, but "is variable between different communities" (88). This is where he begins to make his expansive (especially compared to traditional views) argument about what constitutes inequality: our understanding should "not end with income analysis only" (72). Inequality is affected by income and capability, and the relationship between them is itself affected by things like age, gender, location, and culture, among other things. Sen argues that "real poverty" is complex, and that it can be present even when individuals are living in a situation that puts them at "relative deprivation" of capabilities even when their absolute income is comparatively greater than those in other situations (89). He claims that individuals experience inequality when they are unable to afford the "same social functioning" as other members of that society, and this is why, as Franny mentions in her post, while African Americans in the US may objectively have higher earnings compared to those in less-developed nations, other factors exist that often make it difficult - or impossible - for these individuals to enjoy the same freedoms as non-black citizens. This type of inequality, while not necessarily of income, creates a kind of "social exclusion" that denies certain capabilities (89). 

Sen then begins to touch more on what Franny asks in her post: a meaningful life. Having established the argument that inequality relates to more than unequal income distribution, and that its reduction alone cannot be the "ultimate motivation for antipoverty policy" (it would miss some of the point), he touches on those things whose unequal distribution can constitute inequality: those "actual living things that one can have reason to value" (72). Here, this is accomplished through the example of unemployment, or the "opportunity of having a fulfilling occupation" (94). Sen describes the differences in social culture between the US and Europe, and how while the US faces large income inequalities, Europeans face huge unemployment deficits. He claims that because unemployment can yield many negative psychological (and other) consequences, it cannot be disregarded as irrelevant in discussions of inequality. It must matter "at least as important an issue of inequality, in its own right, as income distribution itself" (95). 

Sen argues that unemployment and its relation to a meaningful life must matter when analyzing economic inequality (95), but that the social differences between the US and Europe largely determine attitudes towards these disparities. In Europe unemployment seems more permissible than in the US due to economic and social attitudes, and Sen advocates that "underlying this contrast is a difference in attitudes towards social and individual responsibilities" between these population, which I find incredibly interesting. I'd love to discuss in seminar what the implications of this claim are. Can inequality be defined like Sen attempts to when everything is determined to be so subjective? What would constitute social exclusion and when is it more directly related to inequality and poverty? What role does living a fulfilling life play into inequality?


p.s. did anyone know we could insert gifs into these posts? no? me neither... until now