There are certain words that get used in the media to convey a whole set of emotions and conclusions from readers, listeners and viewers. 'Fundamentalism' (bad, scary, evil) is one of them; 'iconic' (old, famous, revered) is another; 'robust' (reliable, trustworthy, strong) yet another.
One word which gets thrown around a little too easily is 'inequality.' It's seen as an automatic 'bad thing' and something which politicians, campaigners and economists should be 'solving.' Yet, as is often the case with these words, inequality is a complex issue and not something which can be easily solved. In fact, it's worth asking, can inequality be solved, and should we even be trying?
Today, the development charity Oxfam released research covering inequality not in the developing world, but in the UK. It presented the country as being riven by the consequences of inequality: "The UK is one of the richest countries in the world, but it's a nation divided into the 'haves' and have-nots'".
The media response was predictable. Left-leaning publications used it as an opportunity to critique the government, "Oxfam calls on Theresa May to tackle rising UK inequality," headlined the Guardian. Meanwhile, the right-leaning media jumped in as well. "Oxfam's Monstrous Idiocy About Inequality In The UK," screamed Forbes, histrionically.
We need to dig into the data and also into the meaning of the word 'inequality' to get a better idea of what's going on. First, it's important to note there are different kinds of economic inequality. There's pay inequality ("the difference between people's pay"), income inequality ("all the money received from employment, investments, savings, benefits and pensions") and wealth inequality ("the total amount of assets of an individual or household").
This matters because it's possible to be asset rich, yet still struggling. Think of an older person who owns a house in London. On paper, that person is doing well – but if she can't afford to heat it, pay bills or even eat properly because her income is too low, then there is a problem.
The perfect storm comes when someone is asset poor and also has a low income. The number of people and households at risk of this situation is very large indeed. The Oxfam report points out that, "the richest 10 percent of the UK population own over half of the country's total wealth (54 percent) and the richest 1 percent own nearly a quarter (23 percent), whilst the poorest 20 percent of the population – nearly 13 million people – share just 0.8 percent of the country's wealth between them."
These statistics are a stark and shocking reminder of the division of wealth in the UK. But hasn't this always been the case? And isn't it the price we pay for living in a 'free' market economy?
The Bible is clear that we are all equal before God. Proverbs 22:2 states that, "The rich and the poor have a common bond, The Lord is the maker of them all." But does this mean we should be striving for economic inequality for all as well? There's certainly some evidence for that.
Old Testament laws relating to economic activity are a rich source of inspiration even today. Leviticus 23:22 says, "When you reap the harvest of your land, moreover, you shall not reap to the very corners of your field nor gather the gleaning of your harvest; you are to leave them for the needy and the alien." This shows how there was a minimum standard below which the poor were not to be allowed to fall. Landowners had to ensure there was food available for the dispossessed.
The Hebrew Bible goes much further than this. The sabbatical years saw servants released from duties, while the Jubilee year (every 50 years) was even more radical – with all property to be given back to the family which had owned it originally. This meant that vast inequalities couldn't build up – because property would always have to be returned. Historians debate how often the Jubilee was actually enforced, but it is clear that this law would have an effect on inequality.
Although the Jubilee year wouldn't mean complete equality (property was returned to its original family owner, rather than distributed entirely equally) the Jubilee is an important plank of Christian teaching. It shows that ultimately, everything belongs to God.
This theme is taken on into the New Testament. Jesus' teaching doesn't imply that entrepreneurship is bad – far from it – the parable of the talents suggests, among other things, that wealth creation is praiseworthy. But Jesus also upsets our idea of what equality might mean. The parable of the workers in the vineyard isn't primarily about wages but instead about grace. However, Jesus' teaching that those who work a shorter day can still expect full payment is instructive – ultimate pay equality may not always be possible.
Having said that, the evidence presented by Oxfam is damning. The richest one per cent of the UK population owns more than 20 times the wealth of the poorest fifth. Not only does this flout the principle that God values us all equally, it is also demonstrably bad for our society – the Equality Trust notes that the impacts of such an unequal society range from increased crime rates to poorer health outcomes.
The Oxfam recommendations should all find support from Christian teaching too – more representation on companies' boards, encouraging benefit claimants to undergo training and education, pay ratios of 20:1 so that the best-paid person at a company can earn no more than 20 times the salary of the lowest-paid worker and tackling corporate tax avoidance all make a lot of sense.
Ultimately, perfect economic equality is difficult to achieve. Given the inherent dignity of every human made in the image of God, we should strive for a level of economic equality which ensures individuals have the chance to thrive, protects children against poverty and mitigates against the atomised and divided society that too much inequality produces. Oxfam's initiative is to be welcomed. The Church should be encouraging government, business and civil society to act to reduce the gross inequality we now suffer from.
Follow Andy Walton on Twitter @waltonandy
