Column Does inequality matter?

Font Size

Print

Feedback

Email

Discuss

: billionaires.

Second, the distribution of incomes is often not the most important aspect of inequality. There is a strong ethical case—reflected in the founding aspirations of the Indian nation—that what really matters is inequality of opportunity. In India such inequalities are profound, and importantly shaped by group-based characteristic—caste, tribal status, religion—and location. Even the restricted view of change provided by NSS is not encouraging on these grounds. Household expenditure per capita of scheduled castes is growing at roughly the average rate; that of scheduled tribes is slower. This is real progress, but looks like a poor harvest from decades of attempts to equalise access to basic goods and provide affirmative action for the disadvantaged. Spatial differences have also diverged: in 1990 Tamil Nadu’s per capita income was less than twice Bihar’s; by the mid-2000s it was three times.

Third, there is a good case to expect pressures on inequality to rise. Given the parlous state of the education system—and the long lead times even with effective efforts—the pressure on the market for skills is likely to rise. The economics of agglomeration and institutional inertia will continue to put pressure on spatial differences. The outlook for group-based differences is less clear, but the trends just noted provide only weak encouragement.