What do you think?
Rate this book
Do We Need Economic Inequality?
Although economic inequality provokes widespread disquiet, its supposed necessity is rarely questioned. At best, a basic level of inequality is seen as a necessary evil. At worst, it is seen as insufficient to encourage aspiration, hard work and investment – a refrain sometimes used to advocate ever greater inequality. In this original new book, Danny Dorling critically analyses historical trends and contemporary assumptions in order to question the idea that inequality is an inevitability. What if, he asks, widespread economic inequality is actually just a passing phase, a feature of the capitalist transition from a settled rural way of life to our next highly urban steady-state? Is it really likely that we face a Blade Runner -style dystopian future divided between a tiny elite and an impoverished mass? Dorling shows how, amongst much else, a stabilizing population, changing gender relations and rising access to education make a more egalitarian alternative to this nightmare vision not only preferable, but realistic. This bold contribution to one of the most significant debates of our time will be essential reading for anyone interested in our economic, social and political destiny.
140 pages, Hardcover
Published November 29, 2017
4 people are currently reading
84 people want to read
About the author
Danny Dorling
66 books98 followersDanny Dorling is a British social geographer researching inequality and human geography. He is the Halford Mackinder Professor of Geography of the School of Geography and the Environment of the University of Oxford.
Danny Dorling has lived all his life in England. To try to counter his myopic world view, in 2006, Danny started working with a group of researchers on a project to remap the world (www.worldmapper.org).
He has published with many colleagues more than a dozen books on issues related to social inequalities in Britain and several hundred journal papers. Much of this work is available open access and will be added to this website soon.
His work concerns issues of housing, health, employment, education and poverty. Danny was employed as a play-worker in children’s summer play-schemes. He learnt the ethos of pre-school education where the underlying rationale was that playing is learning for living. He tries not to forget this. He is an Academician of the Academy of the Learned Societies in the Social Sciences, Honorary President of the Society of Cartographers and a patron of Roadpeace, the national charity for road crash victims.
Danny Dorling has lived all his life in England. To try to counter his myopic world view, in 2006, Danny started working with a group of researchers on a project to remap the world (www.worldmapper.org).
He has published with many colleagues more than a dozen books on issues related to social inequalities in Britain and several hundred journal papers. Much of this work is available open access and will be added to this website soon.
His work concerns issues of housing, health, employment, education and poverty. Danny was employed as a play-worker in children’s summer play-schemes. He learnt the ethos of pre-school education where the underlying rationale was that playing is learning for living. He tries not to forget this. He is an Academician of the Academy of the Learned Societies in the Social Sciences, Honorary President of the Society of Cartographers and a patron of Roadpeace, the national charity for road crash victims.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
October 3, 2023
A short and accessible introduction to the history and pathology of our unsustainable levels of income inequality, particularly in the USA and UK. Comparisons with other, more equitable countries, give a clear picture of the pathology gripping the anglophone world the tightest - and crucially break the spell of inevitability around inequality and its ills.
Dorling ends with obligatory optimistism as he looks to the future, and indicates the tide may be turning.
Some surprising correlates with inequality (such as carbon footprint). I want more detail though, but that’s not what this book is for - it’s a short introduction, and Dorling has plenty of other books to move on to for more detail.
Dorling ends with obligatory optimistism as he looks to the future, and indicates the tide may be turning.
Some surprising correlates with inequality (such as carbon footprint). I want more detail though, but that’s not what this book is for - it’s a short introduction, and Dorling has plenty of other books to move on to for more detail.
August 29, 2018
I had high hopes of this book because the title asked an interesting question: what purpose does inequality serve? I'm afraid that the book doesn't answer that question. This is disappointing because it is an opportunity missed.
Inequality has become a feature of British society in recent years. It is often portrayed as an unfortunate consequence of the way in whch we organise our affairs. Many accept this explanation without a good deal of comment. I was hoping for an analytical approach that outlined the costs and the benefits of inequality. Instead, I received something quite different.
The book appears to be hastily written and very poorly edited. This acts against the book because it simple presents an emotional polemic. I understand that the author is against inequality, but he fails to explain why I should be also. The reasoning is unstructured an ill thought out. I found it quite poorly argued. The moral case against inequality is presented, but the author cannot resist surrounding it in such emotional terms that the arguent is unconvincing. The economic case against inequality is barely presented at all.
A more balanced approach is missing. The moral case in favour of inequality is referenced, but it is obvious to the reader that the author is so unsympathetic to it that it barely gets an outing. I would have expected the case to be better presented before reaching the final conclusion, but we didn't reach that point. The economic case for inequality, possibly the strongest point, is just glossed over and dismissed rather too soon.
In all fairness to the book, the chapter on the costs of inequality is quite good. I liked the fact that the costs outlined were not only the financial costs, but also the econmic costs. If this level of analysis could have been maintained for the whole book, something decent might have been produced. As it happens, there is a case to be made, but this book fails to make it.
The book is mercifully short. It is difficult to read because the argument is relatively unstructured and the reader is tempted to argue with the author, who presumes that the reader shares their world view. The book is poorly written and very badly edited. There is little to commend this book, and. if possible, ought to be avoided. It fails to do what it sets out to do, and certainly doesn't answer the question in the title.
Inequality has become a feature of British society in recent years. It is often portrayed as an unfortunate consequence of the way in whch we organise our affairs. Many accept this explanation without a good deal of comment. I was hoping for an analytical approach that outlined the costs and the benefits of inequality. Instead, I received something quite different.
The book appears to be hastily written and very poorly edited. This acts against the book because it simple presents an emotional polemic. I understand that the author is against inequality, but he fails to explain why I should be also. The reasoning is unstructured an ill thought out. I found it quite poorly argued. The moral case against inequality is presented, but the author cannot resist surrounding it in such emotional terms that the arguent is unconvincing. The economic case against inequality is barely presented at all.
A more balanced approach is missing. The moral case in favour of inequality is referenced, but it is obvious to the reader that the author is so unsympathetic to it that it barely gets an outing. I would have expected the case to be better presented before reaching the final conclusion, but we didn't reach that point. The economic case for inequality, possibly the strongest point, is just glossed over and dismissed rather too soon.
In all fairness to the book, the chapter on the costs of inequality is quite good. I liked the fact that the costs outlined were not only the financial costs, but also the econmic costs. If this level of analysis could have been maintained for the whole book, something decent might have been produced. As it happens, there is a case to be made, but this book fails to make it.
The book is mercifully short. It is difficult to read because the argument is relatively unstructured and the reader is tempted to argue with the author, who presumes that the reader shares their world view. The book is poorly written and very badly edited. There is little to commend this book, and. if possible, ought to be avoided. It fails to do what it sets out to do, and certainly doesn't answer the question in the title.
October 4, 2025
DNF - got lazy and bored
October 28, 2018
Classic economic theory assumes some inequality is required in order to stimulate competition and economic growth. This book sets out to challenge that assumption, and gives numerous compelling examples of the ways that inequality harms society.
One of the most memorable images in the book is a graph showing inequality levels in the UK, USA and Netherlands from the 18th Century to the present day. In the UK and USA, for most of the 20th century society became much more equal (in the UK in the 1970s, inequality was the second lowest in Europe), but then from the late 70s onwards inequality grew rapidly until in recent years it has become worse than at any time in recorded history. The UK is now the most unequal country in Europe, while the Netherlands has continued to progress towards greater equality.
The costs of this inequality are many, and are compelling. Contrary to capitalist theory, more unequal countries are less competitive and less innovative. Greater proportions of their national income are spent on activities which create little or no value, such as legal and accounting fees. Health, particularly mental health, suffers: in the USA, life expectancy has already begun falling, and in the UK it has levelled out. The poorest have life expectancies on a par with countries like the the Sudan or Pakistan, while even the very richest live scarcely any longer than the average in more equitable countries such as Norway or Denmark. And massive inequality damages even the super-rich, creating "no-go" areas for them, and requiring from them an ongoing and costly effort to maintain their status and that of their children.
The book offers some hope for the future. Despite the apparently unstoppable rise of inequality, things do not have to remain this way. As faith in democracy breaks down more rapidly in more unequal countries, political and business leaders have cautiously begun looking for answers to this, popular leaders such as Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders attract mass support, and some of the super-rich have even begun to lobby for increased taxes on their wealth, and political . It's not certain that any resulting action will be rapid or significant enough to address our current problems, but Dorling is right: the current state of affaird cannot go on indefinitely.
There are some problems with the book. It contains some rather fanciful assumptions, and ultimately it does not address the question of the title: its arguments are really against today's extreme inequality, not inequality per so. Worst of all, it launches with a hodge-podge of statistics, disjointed statements, confusing graphs, and vague language, which nearly had me abandoning it after the first chapter, but I'm glad I stuck with it.
One of the most memorable images in the book is a graph showing inequality levels in the UK, USA and Netherlands from the 18th Century to the present day. In the UK and USA, for most of the 20th century society became much more equal (in the UK in the 1970s, inequality was the second lowest in Europe), but then from the late 70s onwards inequality grew rapidly until in recent years it has become worse than at any time in recorded history. The UK is now the most unequal country in Europe, while the Netherlands has continued to progress towards greater equality.
The costs of this inequality are many, and are compelling. Contrary to capitalist theory, more unequal countries are less competitive and less innovative. Greater proportions of their national income are spent on activities which create little or no value, such as legal and accounting fees. Health, particularly mental health, suffers: in the USA, life expectancy has already begun falling, and in the UK it has levelled out. The poorest have life expectancies on a par with countries like the the Sudan or Pakistan, while even the very richest live scarcely any longer than the average in more equitable countries such as Norway or Denmark. And massive inequality damages even the super-rich, creating "no-go" areas for them, and requiring from them an ongoing and costly effort to maintain their status and that of their children.
The book offers some hope for the future. Despite the apparently unstoppable rise of inequality, things do not have to remain this way. As faith in democracy breaks down more rapidly in more unequal countries, political and business leaders have cautiously begun looking for answers to this, popular leaders such as Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders attract mass support, and some of the super-rich have even begun to lobby for increased taxes on their wealth, and political . It's not certain that any resulting action will be rapid or significant enough to address our current problems, but Dorling is right: the current state of affaird cannot go on indefinitely.
There are some problems with the book. It contains some rather fanciful assumptions, and ultimately it does not address the question of the title: its arguments are really against today's extreme inequality, not inequality per so. Worst of all, it launches with a hodge-podge of statistics, disjointed statements, confusing graphs, and vague language, which nearly had me abandoning it after the first chapter, but I'm glad I stuck with it.
October 18, 2025
This book was fine. Dorling presents the reader with the notion that inequality is bad, because it is bad for the vast majority. Of course, this is more nuanced and supported with various facts and figures. However, I didn’t feeling I’d read a fresh take.
With that being said, it was interesting how Dorling set up the UK / US to be two bastions of capitalism. I hadn’t appreciated how unequal the UK was… Despite this book being written in 2018, the message is ever more pertinent today, given the macroeconomic climate in 2025.
With that being said, it was interesting how Dorling set up the UK / US to be two bastions of capitalism. I hadn’t appreciated how unequal the UK was… Despite this book being written in 2018, the message is ever more pertinent today, given the macroeconomic climate in 2025.
March 18, 2018
Danny Dorling is Professor of Geography at Oxford University and in this interesting but slightly depressing book he looks at the concept of economic inequality, the way it’s grown over the course of history, the arguments made for and against it and how it encourages bad decision making together with what Dorling considers to be signs for optimism (although I have to say I didn’t share them).
February 10, 2024
It is very scientific with many economics terminology. Slowly, this book opens my thoughts about inequality with analysis and hypothesis.
One thing stuck to me the most is how economics inequality is the root of almost every bad things in humankind.
One thing stuck to me the most is how economics inequality is the root of almost every bad things in humankind.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews