Examining Solutions to Socioeconomic Inequality in Democracies

This essay explores the multifaceted problem of socioeconomic inequality in democratic systems and proposes potential solutions. It critically reviews factors contributing to inequality, such as varying human needs, weakened trade unions, and political polarization. The essay advocates for a transdisciplinary approach involving economists, health professionals, and sociologists to address disparities in wages, education, infrastructure, and healthcare access. Solutions include implementing progressive taxes, regulating rent-seeking, and strengthening policies against corruption. The author emphasizes the importance of raising awareness, re-establishing labor unions, and fostering collaboration among stakeholders to achieve socioeconomic equilibrium. Desklib offers this essay and other resources for students.

Running head: SOLUTIONS OF SOCIOECONOMIC INEQUALITY IN DEMOCRACIES
1
Solutions to socioeconomic inequality in democracies
Name of Student
Institutional Affiliation
Name of Professor
Date

SOLUTIONS TO SOCIOECONOMIC INEQUALITIES IN DEMOCRACIES
2
Solutions to socioeconomic inequality in democracies
Introduction
A democracy is a state ruled by a government system where the elected individuals
represent the citizens. However, since it is impossible for all the people to be active in the
governance practices, the democracy is purported to be a measure that is meant to fairness and
equality of individuals in the society. Contrary to the anticipated notions, (Schwartzberg, 2018,
pp.1-13) acknowledges that most democratic governances have not achieved the equality and
fairness among the relevant citizens to these democracies. He further explains that fairness and
equality are centred on the economic and financial status of individuals and their social
subgroupings. As a result, this essay seeks to address the factors that have led to the
socioeconomic inequality and how they can be addressed in democratic governances to achieve a
desirable equilibrium (Bonica et al., 2013, pp.103-104).
The critical review of factors leading to socioeconomic inequality in democracies
Many studies have been conducted over the subject to outline the factors that have led to
the social and economic inequalities despite the democracies being in place. Some studies
ascertain that social and economic groupings are defined by the wide range of human needs
(Jerome, 2013, pp.39-45). The author further elaborates that the majority of human needs cutting
across the spiritual needs to the economic needs have placed the labourers in different positions
of social groupings, which are defined by their political and financial status thus creating an
equality gap among the people. In the past, Maslow defined the necessity of meeting basic
human needs back in 1943. He stated that unless the physical and psychological needs of human
beings are met, they could not demand their next need. Moreover, he claimed that if a person

SOLUTIONS TO SOCIOECONOMIC INEQUALITIES IN DEMOCRACIES
3
cannot provide for himself/herself, they tend to change their environment or their current need.
(Siqueira et al., 2014, pp.557-572) further, build on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs by claiming
that the most suitable solution through addressing the socioeconomic inequality through the trade
unions to defend the worker and the labourers
Additionally, (Goos, Maarten, and Alan, 2009, pp.58-63) in their findings, points out that
at least 18 out of 24 developed countries have a significant decrease in the number of trade
unions between 1970 and 2003. The authors claim that the decrease in the trade unions led to the
weakening of the union that levied minimal pressure to the politicians across the democracies to
distribute resources equally for social expenditures. This gradually accrued to the different
classes and status of social and economic inequality in the democracies. Furthermore, (Offe,
2018, pp.74-83) emphasizes the importance of being aware of the existing social inequalities
among the labourers. He narrates that thinking aloud of the inequalities and taking actions via
calling the trade unions to attention would aid to increase the number of union members who will
take charge of defending the rights of the workers. However, the increase in the number of the
trade unions whose rights and freedom are defended will increase the number of the individuals
or activists who think aloud and are ready to point the inequality practices in the democracies.
The increase in the awareness of social and economic inequality through organized movements
is a potential milestone to reduce inequality.
Concisely, (Kern and Anna, 2018, pp.724-744) in there findings highlight that another
major contributor to inequality is the ideological and political polarization that determines the
individuals’ participation in elections, income distribution in different regions and groups,
support for the marginal candidates during campaigns, and the attention to the politically based

SOLUTIONS TO SOCIOECONOMIC INEQUALITIES IN DEMOCRACIES
4
solutions during crises in the US. However, the political polarization could be could be addressed
through reforming the reforming the election process that promotes socioeconomic equality,
increasing the voter turnout through efforts that will target voters who frequently do not vote due
to voter suppression, and reforming the legislation systems that promote the voters’ power and
mandate to elect their leaders.
Solutions to socioeconomic inequality using transdisciplinary approach
Reports have revealed the reasons and the solutions to the increasing inequality in
democracies. The broad perspectives to the causes and the remedies to the inequality of the
experts in different fields are heavily rooted to the decisions made by the politicians, the
economists, the health professionals, and the sociologists among others. A transdisciplinary
approach is a mechanism aimed at bridging the inequalities across different fields, which define
the social and economic groupings of the individuals in democratic countries.
The economists have acknowledged that the solutions to the socioeconomic inequality
are variable (Goda, Thomas, and Ozlem, 2017, pp.1-27). This due to the variation in the aspects
such as the wages, support for the early childhood education, levels of infrastructure in different
regions, poor rates of employment, retraining of the people who have lost their jobs, distribution
and allocation of the resources, and the economic disparities between the rich and the poor. He
further claims that the inequalities could also be addressed through the effective implementation
of the inheritance and the progressive taxes, setting in place the regulations and the laws that
control the negative effects of rent-seeking and the addressing of the loopholes in the tax
departments that are prowled on by the rich to evade the payment of taxes.

SOLUTIONS TO SOCIOECONOMIC INEQUALITIES IN DEMOCRACIES
5
Another way to achieve a socioeconomic equilibrium across the entire democracy is
through a facilitated medical care across the entire country. An inclusive and comprehensive
medical cover for all the citizens in a democracy will ensure that the individuals from all the
social groupings both the rich and the poor have access to the medical facilities without
discrimination. (Dimant and Eugen, 2018, pp.335-356) attributes that the major threat to the
socioeconomic equality is centred on the greedy and corrupt political leaders who starve the
public with the rights and privileges to access the national resources thus leading to inequality.
With well-structured policies and the court systems, these leaders could be subjected to means of
punishment in cases of embezzling the national resources meant for the public.
Conclusion
In conclusion, achieving a socioeconomic equality is challenging and much harder than
diagnosing the inequality. The inequalities are expected to be self-correcting among the
democracies according to the standard economic approach. However, the main problem in the
democracies is the pluralism approach where economic inequality is an advantage for the rich
where the rich tend to be given priorities and privileges in decisions made. This could be
countered through the formation and re-establishment of labourers and the trade unions to air out
the grievances of the labourers. Additionally, all the stakeholders should work together to
mobilize the ideas across all the segments and groupings across the parliament, businesses, and
hospitals among others that will contribute to the socioeconomic equilibrium.

SOLUTIONS TO SOCIOECONOMIC INEQUALITIES IN DEMOCRACIES
6
References
Bonica, A., McCarty, N., Poole, K. T., & Rosenthal, H. (2013). Why hasn't democracy slowed
rising inequality?. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 27(3), 103-24.
Dimant, E., & Tosato, G. (2018). Causes and effects of corruption: what has past decade's
empirical research taught us? A survey. Journal of Economic Surveys, 32(2), 335-356.
Goda, T., Onaran, Ö., & Stockhammer, E. (2017). Income inequality and wealth concentration in
the recent crisis. Development and Change, 48(1), 3-27.
Goos, M., Manning, A., & Salomons, A. (2009). Job polarization in Europe. American economic
review, 99(2), 58-63.
Jerome, N. (2013). Application of the Maslow’s hierarchy of need theory; impacts and
implications on organizational culture, human resource and employee’s
performance. International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 2(3), 39-45.
Kern, A., & Hooghe, M. (2018). The effect of direct democracy on the social stratification of
political participation: Inequality in democratic fatigue?. Comparative European
Politics, 16(4), 724-744.
Offe, C. (2018). Framing Inequality and Related Policy Responses. Norsk sociologist
Tidsskrift, 2(01), 74-83.
Siqueira, C. E., Gaydos, M., Monforton, C., Slatin, C., Borkowski, L., Dooley, P., ... & Keifer,
M. (2014). Effects of social, economic, and labor policies on occupational health
disparities. American journal of industrial medicine, 57(5), 557-572.

SOLUTIONS TO SOCIOECONOMIC INEQUALITIES IN DEMOCRACIES
7
Schwartzberg, M. (2018). Justifying the Jury: Reconciling Justice, Equality, and
Democracy. American Political Science Review, 1-13.