The Growing Gap Between Rich and Poor

[Bill Mattocks]

It's a tragedy, I tell you...

Catholic Quarterly Review, October 1887:

A prodigious increase in the production of wealth and its distribution against the common man are characteristics of our age. If small fortunes have multiplied, great ones have multiplied more rapidly. The gap between rich and poor has widened and is widening. The struggle to live, in the lower ranks especially, is great and growing. Laborers often get little more than what is necessary to mere subsistence.

Rich and Poor, by Mrs. Bernard Bosanquet, 1896:

The separation between rich and poor in our large towns, and more especially in London, has often been pointed out as one of the most characteristic and threatening signs of the times. On the one hand, it is said, we have a large number of wealthy people, living an idle, luxurious life in their own quarter, and knowing or caring little about anything outside; on the other hand, we have a much larger number ot poverty-stricken people herded together at the opposite extreme of the town, with all their energies exhausted in the futile endeavour to secure a tolerable existence. The contrast is a striking one, so long as we look only at the extremes. But to look only at extremes gives us no true picture of society as a whole, and tends rather to hide the very real resemblances and relations between rich and poor. If the different classes in society really were cut off from each other in this way, it would be vain to hope for the time when the gulf should be bridged over, and they should feel their real brotherhood as members of one community. But in imagining such a division we ignore the infinite gradations in the social scale which make it impossible, or at any rate an entirely arbitrary proceeding, to draw a line anywhere, and say " Here are the few rich, there the many poor." In older types of society there was no doubt a far nearer approach to an absolute division between high and low; but then in older types of society we find little to correspond to our middle class of modern times. Nay, even the middle class itself is now breaking up, and we have upper and lower middle classes, with any number of gradations within them to which those immediately concerned are very sensitive.

England As It Is: Political, Social, and Industrial, by William Johnston, Esq., 1851

So far as general literature goes, and so far as public debating and remonstrances in public journals may be relied upon as evidence of a prevailing sentiment, there is no want of public consciousness of the great social evil of the time. I mean the separation between rich and poor— the dissympathy of classes, and that mutual disgust which appears to threaten some sort of violent revolution in society at no very distant period.* But I think it worthy of especial note, that, while this danger is rung into the ears of the reading classes month by month, week by week, and even day by day, the practice of society undergoes no change. The tendency to isolation of classes, which arises out of circumstances, and out of the habits which have been acquired, is too strong to be affected by essays, novels, newspapers, and reviews. Institutions for scientific and literary teaching by lectures, at the cheapest possible rates, are established; parks for the recreation of the lower orders are planted ; even clubs, upon something like the aristocratic model, are established, where conveniences and luxuries are supplied at low prices : but all this seems to be unsuccessful. It is a sort of copper-lace imitation of genuine finery, which actually feeds the fatal contempt of the rich English for those who cannot afford all that money will purchase. What one wants to see is not the aping of the hahits of the rich by the less wealthy in a cheaper and coarser manner, but a mutual and hearty recognition of the differences of condition—a kind and cordial condescension on the one side, and an equally cordial, but still respectful, devotedness on the other. But this, as I have said, appears to makes no progress. The vulgar attempts at imitation and rivalship to which I have alluded, only widen the breach, and render the return to a healthier and happier state of things more hopeless.

* A recent publication of M. de Lamartine informs the world that the danger of this kind which did exist in England has passed away under the influence of our great improvements of late years. I know no one who utters more splendid nonsense than M. de Lamartine.

I could go on. The point is that in every age, there is a great hue and cry from time to time that the gap between the rich and the poor is wider than it has ever been, and widening still; that society cannot take much more of this; and even that there will shortly be a revolution if 'something' is not done.

And yet we still survive.

But each time, the alarmists claim, is the 'real' threat, the 'actual' danger, and each time is fundamentally unlike all the previous times.

Perhaps this time, the threat is real. But I have trouble believing it.

 

[Steve]

Or perhaps, people identify the threat and take actions to alleviate it. Cycles are inevitable in most things, and why should this be different? The pendulum swings one way. We react, and send it back the other way.

Take smog in LA. Was a huge problem. Now, as a result of actions taken, it's not. Air quality is pretty good. I've heard people suggest that the Cali air quality laws are alarmist, and the "proof" has been, "Look around. Our air's great! None of those bad things happened."

I guess for me, there's a potential chicken/egg situation.

 

[LuckyKBoxer]

Or perhaps, people identify the threat and take actions to alleviate it. Cycles are inevitable in most things, and why should this be different? The pendulum swings one way. We react, and send it back the other way.

Take smog in LA. Was a huge problem. Now, as a result of actions taken, it's not. Air quality is pretty good. I've heard people suggest that the Cali air quality laws are alarmist, and the "proof" has been, "Look around. Our air's great! None of those bad things happened."

I guess for me, there's a potential chicken/egg situation.

ROFLMAO
LA air quality is now good?
easily said by someone living in another state
hahahahaha
oh thats classic.

 

[Steve]

ROFLMAO
LA air quality is now good?
easily said by someone living in another state
hahahahaha
oh thats classic.

Markedly better than in the past. I'm down there several times per year and the yellow haze around LA is nothing like it was in decades past. According to the California State EPA, there were over 200 Stage 1 alerts (over .20 ppm ozone) per year in the 70's down to under 10 per year now. The highest levels of pollution in LA have dropped by 25% since the 80's and annual exposure to smog decreased by half.

If you look at air quality maps, the difference is clear, and this is in spite of a huge increase in the population leading to a much larger amount of pollution causing sources such as automobiles and industry.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

I love LA but I would not say that the smog problem is good there. Actually I think they need to do a lot more work!