Buy essay on Inequality and Its Impact on the Society

Inequality is probably one of the most debatable issues because the inequality of people provoked to conflict with each other. The disparity in the socioeconomic field and in the well-being of individuals was particularly significant and influential in terms of the development of social relations. In this regard, many scientists and philosophers, such as Adam Smith and Jean Jacques Rousseau, paid a lot of attention to the origin, causes and effects of inequality on the life of people and society at large. In fact, they studied the problem of inequality and their views contributed to the development of contemporary diverse views on the problem of persisting inequality in human society, its nature, and effects on social relations as well as its correlation to the dominant ethical and moral norms existing in the society. At this point, it is important to place emphasis on the fact that inequality persisted through century. The inequality dates back to the dawn of the development of human society to present days and it is likely to persist in the future, but the root of the inequality grow from the economic disparity and the material ground of the inequality contributes to its blossoming at the moment and it is likely to persist as well as the wealth and material well-being of individuals differ.
In this respect, it is possible to refer to Adam Smith, who was one of the prominent philosophers, whose works help to understand the origin of inequality and social injustice. At the same time, Adam Smith argues that the gap between individuals has started to widen along with the development of the division of labor and the rise of capitalism (Smith part 7, 29). To put it more precisely, Adam Smith argued that the inequality between people grew wider, when the division of labor had started to progress that became particularly obvious in urban areas. To put it more precisely, people living and working in urban areas focused on specific occupations, which contributed to the division of labor and traded their products to obtain other products they need for living. Adam Smith argued that the division of labor rose on the ground of the developing capitalist relationships (Smith part 7, 29). The change in socioeconomic relations, the development of technologies, and consistent social changes contributed to the division of labor. In such a way, the society became vulnerable to the narrow specialization on specific occupations. The division of labor in its turn stimulated the development of trade and widening gap between people working in different fields. Smith believes that progress defines the place individuals take in the society and nations take place in the world on the ground of the division of labor (Smith, part 8, 31). At the same time, the division of labor contributes to the growing disparity not only between individuals but also between nations. In this regard, Adam Smith argued that countries that are more successful in their socioeconomic and technological development can take the lead in the global division of labor. As a result, countries take their niche in the global market and the technologically and economically advanced countries take the lead in the global market. In this regard, Adam Smith argues that North, namely Europe and North America are in an advantageous position compared to Southern countries in terms of the division of labor. They outpaced other regions of the world due to the faster socioeconomic and technological development, available resources and rise of capitalism in England, where it spread to other countries of Europe, North America and worldwide.
However, the division of labor contributes not only to the growing wealth of some nations provoking the wide inequality in the world but also to the growing inequality within societies. In fact, Adam Smith argued that the more society develops the more individuals become independent and skilled (Smith part 8, 31). This progress contributes to the growing inequality between people become some individuals become more skilled than others. As a result, they take a better position in the society and their occupations allow them to earn more than less qualified individuals. In this regard, Adam Smith argues that landlords are in a particularly beneficial position, although their nature is purely predatory because they have no specific occupation but they just enjoy the benefits lending their land to peasants, who have to work hard to earn for living but they have to give a considerable part of their crops and earnings to landlords, who possess the land, where landless peasants work (Smith part 6, 28).