In recent years, with the development of industrialization and modernization, groups of citizens have thought that the happiest community is a place where there is no gap between the wealthy and the poor. However, it still remains a controversial issue among many people, and the discussion below will clarify my perspective.
On the one hand, numerous opponents agree with this statement because income equality can reduce stress and social tension. It means that large income gaps lead people to feelings of unfairness and susceptibility. Societies that have a small difference in the GDP of each member tend to have a higher level of social harmony and happiness. For example, in certain European countries such as Switzerland, their citizens have equal subsistence levels, so they seem to engaging with any stresses or having problems related to the possession. Moreover, reducing poverty improves the quality of life for the poorest. When the communities have rich numbers, there are lots of investments in infrastructure, medical institutes, schools, and facilities that can help the lower class easily access these amenities, which enhances their well-being. Accordingly, the more income individuals earn, the more happiness societies have, and that can lessen the hierarchy tendency in the modern day.
On the other hand, the opponents argue that wealth equality alone does not guarantee happiness. The prime society is not based on happiness solely, it also includes other factors like relationships, work satisfaction, and mental health. The same income means that dwellers need to work at the same time, or maybe have a similar working schedule, which leads more incompetent people to get stressed than genius due to each people born with an altered intelligence condition. Furthermore, the living standard of the poor cannot be improved if they do not make any efforts for their lives. Some argue that economic growth can increase overall happiness even with income inequality. It means that as long as every individual’s standard of living is enhanced, the wealth gap becomes less important. For instance, people live in a dynamic economic stage, such as Singapore, where are many opportunities opened for their citizens and that may foster happiness and satisfaction for personal success.
In conclusion, this outstanding phenomenon mentioned above has outlined many opinions about this statement. As far as I am concerned, I believe that while reducing wealth inequality can contribute to a happier society, other factors such as economic opportunities, working environments, and personal well-being are also crucial, and need to be aware.