There is great inequality in our world: people are starving; some do not have shelter and sleep on the streets; some have to rely on loans and mortgages which could ruin them. All this is happening and some people, such as footballers and bankers, are earning in a week what a well-off person would earn in a year. Is this unfair, or is it justified?
In Yemen, at the moment there is a massive starvation crisis and millions of people have nothing to eat, whereas the countries of the UAE are living in luxury, builing ice rinks in shopping malls, employing thousands of people to work for them, buying their own private islands and huge yachts. The difference of lifestyle between them is huge, and people who struggle for their everyday needs are being completely ignored by those who have too much money to spare. Is this fair?
One point of view is that there are people on the brink of death and they should be helped by people who don't need the money to help them. This should not be left down to the government of the country in trouble, which would be ruined, they should have assistance. The UN should make these people who have lots of useless money put it to a good cause, or make rules about how much people sould be allowed to earn, so that the economy does not get out of hand, and money can be distributed to those in greatest need of it, not just the people who earn it. Also, the countries, Yemen for example, did not choose for this to happen, it probably happened because of war or drought or something similar to that.
They may also think that people such as footballers and bankers being paid massive amounts of money is unfair: all bankers do is sort out finance problems for their bank and only think about themselves. People such as nurses and teachers should get paid more becausethe benefit the community generally and make a positive difference. Also, teachers educate people, which is good for the general welfare of the country because a research has shown that those educated to a higher standard (eg. secondary) are much less likely to commit crimes and are more likely to affect the community positively. Education also produces money; those who have been educated are much more likely to earn more money for themselves and the country, thus benefitting the economy. This is all put in place by teachers. Nurses and doctors help to keep people alive and well, which benefits us generally and helps the economy as they keep the money-making people alive well, and do a vital job: many people could die without them.
On the other hand, the opinion of some people may be that the very rich and wealthy people have made their money themselves, they have put hard work into it, and they have a right to do what they want with it. After all, they have probably worked hard to get where they are, earnt their money through toil and perseverance, and can do what they want with it, it is their money. Legally nobody can force them to do anything with it, as it is their property. Also, the country which is in trouble has got itself there; it should have tried harder to sustain itself financially and should have taken more care with what they spent their money on; it is not the fault of the rich people who would be made to pay for it. Even if it was the fault of a war or some other disaster, whatever happened was almost definitely not started by the people who have the money to pay for it.
In the instance of the wages of richer citizens such as footballers and those of doctors, nurses and teachers, you might argue that they are paid as much as they are because of how much money they produce. In the instance of footballers, companies such as Nike, and businesses such as car firms, sponsor players to wear their products, or teams to have their logo on famous players' shirts. They generate this money, and businesses choose to pay it to them, so they deserve it, why should it be given to those who do not generate any money for the economy or much for themselves, but do their job not for the benefit of themselves but for others. They do not earn the money which the companies pay, so why should it be given to them?
A counter argument to this would be that doctors keep the people that earn the money for the economy alive, and teachers teach them what they need to know to earn the money they do. If nobody had an eduction taught by a teacher or a life kept going by doctors and nurses, then nobody would be able to earn the money, and there would not be any money made because nobody would hve invented it or know how to.
Another point of view is that more taxes should be chaged of richer citizens to be supplied to schools and hospitals. Although there is an income tax, some people believe that it should impact those earning millions more heavily as this would change the world greatly, positively. This would mean that governments could spend more money on helping the environment and humanitarian causes, as well as being able to provide more funding to schools and healthcre operations such as the National Health Service (the NHS).
My opinion is that, philosophically and what I believe, not think financially, more money should be paid to those who positively impact the community and do things just to make te world a better place, not to earn money for themselves (eg. police, doctors, nurses, teachers, etc.). However, if youu think about it from a financial point of view, I would say that, as police, etc., do not make the money, the people such as footballers do, then they are helping the economy, so they should get the money. This is a very hard decision for the government, and people all over the world have been puzling over it for decades.
What do you think?