Social inequality is a consequence of uneven access of members of society to spiritual and material resources, which leads to stratification and the formation of a vertical hierarchy. People at different levels of the hierarchy have unequal life chances in realizing their aspirations and needs. Any society is structured in one way or another: according to national, geographic, gender, demographic or other characteristics. However, social inequality has a completely unique

nature. Its main source is the development of civilization itself, existing in the form of society.

Causes of social inequality

Every society in human history has been characterized by the specialization of its members. This fact alone in the future gives rise to social inequality, since specialization sooner or later leads to a difference between more and less popular forms of activity. Thus, in the most primitive societies, shaman healers and warriors had the highest status. Usually the best of them became the heads of a tribe or people. At the same time, such differentiation does not necessarily imply the accompanying material benefits. In primitive society, social inequality is not at all the result of material stratification, since trade relations themselves did not yet matter. However, the fundamental reason remains the same - specialization. In modern society, people, for example, find themselves in a privileged position

creating a cultural product - film actors, television presenters, professional athletes and others.

Inequality criteria

As we have already seen from the example of primitive societies, social inequality can be expressed not only in material status. And history knows many such examples. Thus, for medieval Europe, pedigree was an extremely important factor in social status. Noble origin alone determined a high status in society, regardless of wealth. At the same time, the countries of the East hardly knew such a class-hierarchical model. All subjects of the state - viziers and peasants - were equal slaves in the face of the sovereign, whose status came from the simple fact of power. Sociologist Max Weber identified three possible criteria for inequality:

Thus, the difference in income, social respect and honor, as well as the number of subordinates, depending on the value guidelines of society, can have different effects on the final social status of a person.

Social inequality coefficient

Over the past two hundred years, there have been debates among economists and sociologists about the degree of stratification in a particular society. Thus, according to Vilfredo Pareto, the ratio of poor and rich is a constant. In contrast, the teachings of Marxism indicate that there is a constant increase in social differentiation - the poor are becoming poorer, the rich are getting richer. However, the practical experience of the twentieth century has demonstrated that if such increasing stratification occurs, it makes society unstable and ultimately leads to social upheaval.

Even a superficial look at the people around us gives reason to talk about their dissimilarity. People are different by gender, age, temperament, height, hair color, level of intelligence and many other characteristics. Nature endowed one with musical abilities, another with strength, a third with beauty, and for someone she prepared the fate of a frail and disabled person. Differences between people, due to their physiological and mental characteristics, are called natural.

All societies known to history were organized in such a way that some social groups always had a privileged position over others, which was expressed in the unequal distribution of social benefits and powers. In other words, all societies without exception are characterized by social inequality. Even the ancient philosopher Plato argued that any city, no matter how small it may be, is actually divided into two halves - one for the poor, the other for the rich, and they are at enmity with each other.

Natural differences are far from harmless; they can become the basis for the emergence of unequal relationships between individuals. The strong force the weak, the cunning prevail over the simpletons. Inequality arising from natural differences is the first form of inequality, which appears in one form or another in some animal species. However, in In human society, the main thing is social inequality, inextricably linked with social differences, social differentiation.

Inequality between people exists in any society. This is quite natural and logical, given that people differ in their abilities, interests, life preferences, value orientations, etc. In every society there are poor and rich, educated and uneducated, enterprising and non-entrepreneurial, those with power and those without it. In this regard, the problem of the origin of social inequality, attitudes towards it and ways to eliminate it have always aroused increased interest among researchers, politicians and society, which consider social inequality as injustice.

In the absence of social inequality, individuals would have no incentive to engage in complex and labor-intensive, dangerous or uninteresting activities, or to improve their skills. With the help of inequality in income and prestige, society encourages individuals to engage in necessary but difficult and unpleasant professions, rewards the more educated and talented, etc.

Social inequality– a form of differentiation in which individuals, social groups, strata, classes are at different levels of the vertical social hierarchy and have unequal life chances and opportunities to satisfy needs.

In its most general form, inequality means that people live in conditions in which they have unequal access to limited resources for material and spiritual consumption.

Social inequality is perceived and experienced by many people (primarily the unemployed, economic migrants, those who find themselves at or below the poverty line) as a manifestation of injustice. Social inequality and wealth stratification in society, as a rule, lead to increased social tension in society.

The main principles of social policy are:

1. protecting the standard of living by introducing various forms of compensation for price increases and indexing;

2. providing assistance to the poorest families;

3. provision of assistance in case of unemployment;

4. ensuring social insurance policy, establishing a minimum wage for workers;

5. development of education, health protection, and the environment mainly at the expense of the state;

6. pursuing an active policy aimed at ensuring qualifications.

Social are called those differences, which generated by social factors: way of life (urban and rural population), division of labor (mental and manual workers), social roles (father, doctor, politician), etc., which leads to differences in the degree of ownership of property, income received, power, achievement social status, prestige, education.

Different levels of social development are basis for social inequality, the emergence of rich and poor, stratification of society, its stratification (stratum is a layer that includes people with the same income, power, education, prestige).

Income– the amount of cash receipts received by an individual per unit of time. This may be labor, or it may be the ownership of property that “works.”

Education– a complex of knowledge acquired in educational institutions. Its level is measured by the number of years of education. Let's say, junior high school is 9 years. The professor has more than 20 years of education behind him.

INTRODUCTION

Among the most important theoretical problems of sociology we can highlight the problem of social inequality. Social inequality has existed throughout human history.

All developed societies are characterized by unequal distribution of material and spiritual benefits, rewards and opportunities. Social inequality can be generated by people belonging to certain social, professional and socio-demographic groups. Even natural genetic or physical differences between people can cause unequal relationships.

In all centuries, many scientists have thought about the nature of relations between people, about the plight of most people, about the problem of the oppressed and the oppressors, about the justice or injustice of inequality. Even the ancient philosopher Plato reflected on the stratification of people into rich and poor. He believed that the state was, as it were, two states. One is made up of the poor, the other is made up of the rich, and they all live together, plotting all sorts of intrigues against each other. In such a society, people are haunted by fear and uncertainty. A healthy society should be different.

1. Social inequality

Social inequality is a form of social differentiation in which individuals, social groups, layers, classes are at different levels of the vertical social hierarchy and have unequal life chances and opportunities to meet needs.

In its most general form, inequality means that people live in conditions in which they have unequal access to limited resources for material and spiritual consumption.

Fulfilling qualitatively unequal working conditions and satisfying social needs to varying degrees, people sometimes find themselves engaged in economically heterogeneous labor, because these types of labor have different assessments of their social usefulness. Considering the dissatisfaction of members of society with the existing system of distribution of power, property and conditions for individual development, it is still necessary to keep in mind the universality of human inequality.

The main mechanisms of social inequality are relations of property, power (dominance and subordination), social (i.e. socially assigned and hierarchized) division of labor, as well as uncontrolled, spontaneous social differentiation. These mechanisms are mainly associated with the characteristics of a market economy, with inevitable competition (including in the labor market) and unemployment. Social inequality is perceived and experienced by many people (primarily the unemployed, economic migrants, those who find themselves at or below the poverty line) as a manifestation of injustice. Social inequality and wealth stratification in society, as a rule, lead to increased social tension, especially during the transition period. This is precisely what is typical for Russia at present.

2.The essence of social inequality

The essence of social inequality lies in the unequal access of different categories of the population to socially significant benefits, scarce resources, and liquid values. The essence of economic inequality is that a minority of the population always owns the majority of national wealth. In other words, the highest incomes are received by the smallest part of society, and the average and lowest incomes are received by the majority of the population.

Inequality characterizes society as a whole, poverty characterizes only part of the population. Depending on the level of economic development of a country, poverty affects a significant or insignificant part of the population.

To measure the scale of poverty, sociologists identify the proportion of that part of the country's population (usually expressed as a percentage) that lives near the official poverty line, or threshold. The terms “poverty level”, “poverty lines” and “poverty ratio” are also used to indicate the scale of poverty.

The poverty threshold is an amount of money (usually expressed, for example, in dollars or rubles) officially established as the minimum income that is enough for an individual or family to purchase food, clothing and housing. It is also called the "poverty level". In Russia, it received an additional name - the living wage.

In sociology, a distinction is made between absolute and relative poverty.

Absolute poverty is understood as a condition in which an individual, with his income, is unable to satisfy even the basic needs for food, housing, clothing, warmth, or is able to satisfy only the minimum needs that ensure biological survival. The numerical criterion here is the poverty threshold (subsistence level).

Relative poverty refers to the inability to maintain a decent standard of living, or some standard of living accepted in a given society. Typically, relative poverty is less than half the average household income in a given country. Relative poverty measures how poor a particular individual or family is compared to other people. It is a comparative characteristic in two respects. Firstly, it shows that a person (family) is poor relative to the abundance or prosperity that other members of society who are not considered poor have. The first meaning of relative poverty is the comparison of one stratum with other strata, or strata. Secondly, it shows that a person (family) is poor relative to some standard of life, for example the standard of a decent or decent life.

The lower limit of relative poverty is the subsistence minimum or poverty threshold, and the upper limit is the so-called decent standard of living. A decent standard of living reflects the amount of material wealth that allows a person to satisfy all reasonable needs, lead a fairly comfortable lifestyle, and not feel disadvantaged.

There is simply no universal level of decent or “normal” life for all strata and social groups. For each class and category of the population it is different, and the spread of values ​​is very significant.

3.Causes of social inequality

Functionalism explains inequality based on the differentiation of social functions performed by different strata, classes, and communities. The functioning and development of society are possible only thanks to the division of labor, when each social group solves the corresponding tasks that are vital for the entire integrity: some are engaged in the production of material goods, others create spiritual values, others manage, etc. For the normal functioning of society, an optimal combination of all is necessary types of human activity. Some of them are more important, others less. Thus, on the basis of the hierarchy of social functions, a corresponding hierarchy of classes and layers that perform them is formed. Those who exercise general leadership and management of the country are invariably placed at the top of the social ladder, because only they can support and ensure the unity of society and create the necessary conditions for the successful performance of other functions.

Observations of the actions and behavior of specific individuals gave impetus to the development of a status explanation of social inequality. Each person, occupying a certain place in society, acquires his own status. Social inequality is inequality of status arising both from the ability of individuals to fulfill one or another social role (for example, to be competent to manage, to have the appropriate knowledge and skills to be a doctor, lawyer, etc.), and from the opportunities allowing a person to achieve one or another position in society (ownership of property, capital, origin, belonging to influential political forces).

Let's consider an economic view of the problem. In accordance with this point of view, the root cause of social inequality lies in unequal treatment of property and distribution of material goods. This approach was most clearly manifested in Marxism. According to his version, it was the emergence of private property that led to the social stratification of society and the formation of antagonistic classes. The exaggeration of the role of private property in the social stratification of society led Marx and his followers to the conclusion that it was possible to eliminate social inequality by establishing public ownership of the means of production.

The lack of a unified approach to explaining the origins of social inequality is due to the fact that it is always perceived at at least two levels. Firstly, as a property of society. Written history does not know societies without social inequality. The struggle of people, parties, groups, classes is a struggle for the possession of greater social opportunities, advantages and privileges. If inequality is an inherent property of society, therefore, it carries a positive functional load. Society reproduces inequality because it needs it as a source of life support and development.

Secondly, inequality is always perceived as unequal relations between people and groups. Therefore, it becomes natural to strive to find the origins of this unequal position in the characteristics of a person’s position in society: in the possession of property, power, in the personal qualities of individuals. This approach is now widespread.

Inequality has many faces and manifests itself in various parts of a single social organism: in the family, in an institution, in an enterprise, in small and large social groups. It is a necessary condition for the organization of social life. Parents, having an advantage in experience, skills, and financial resources over their young children, have the opportunity to influence the latter, facilitating their socialization. The functioning of any enterprise is carried out on the basis of the division of labor into managerial and subordinate-executive. The appearance of a leader in a team helps to unite it and transform it into a stable entity, but at the same time it is accompanied by the granting of special rights to the leader.

4.Types of social inequality

We can identify inequality based on a number of characteristics:

I) Inequality based on physical characteristics, which can be divided into three types of inequalities: 1) Inequality based on physical differences; 2) Sexual inequality; 3) Inequality by age;

The reasons for the first inequality include belonging to a particular race, nationality, a certain height, fatness or thinness of the body, hair color, and even blood type. Very often the distribution of social benefits in society depends on some physical characteristic. Inequality is especially pronounced if the carrier of the trait is part of a “minority group.” Very often a minority group is discriminated against. One type of this inequality is “racism”. Some sociologists believe that economic competition is the cause of ethnic inequality. Proponents of this approach emphasize the role of competition between groups of workers for scarce jobs. People with jobs (especially those in lower positions) feel threatened by job seekers. When the latter are members of ethnic groups, hostility may arise or intensify. Also, one of the reasons for the inequality of ethnic inequality can be considered the personal qualities of an individual, demonstrating which he considers another race inferior.

Sexual inequality is caused mainly by gender roles and sex roles. Basically, gender differences lead to inequality in the economic environment. Women have much less chance in life to participate in the distribution of social benefits: from Ancient India, in which girls were simply killed, to modern society, in which it is difficult for women to find work. This is connected, first of all, with sexual roles - a man’s place at work, a woman’s place at home.

The type of inequality associated with age mainly manifests itself in the different life chances of different age groups. Basically, it manifests itself at young and retirement age. Age inequality always affects us all.

II) Inequality due to differences in prescribed statuses

Prescribed (ascriptive) status includes inherited factors: race, nationality, age, gender, place of birth, residence, marital status, some aspects of the parents. Very often, a person’s prescribed statuses interfere with a person’s vertical mobility, due to discrimination in society. This type of inequality includes a large number of aspects, and therefore very often leads to social inequality.

III) Inequality based on wealth ownership

IV) Inequality based on power

V) Inequality of prestige

VI) Cultural-symbolic inequality.

3.1.Social classes

Despite the fact that social class is one of the central concepts in sociology, scientists still do not have a common point of view regarding the content of this concept. For the first time we find a detailed picture of class society in the works of K. Marx. We can say that social classes in Marx are economically determined and genetically conflicting groups. The basis for division into groups is the presence or absence of property. The feudal lord and the serf in a feudal society, the bourgeois and the proletarian in a capitalist society are antagonistic classes that inevitably appear in any society that has a complex hierarchical structure based on inequality

Despite the revision, from the point of view of modern society, of many provisions of the class theory of K. Max, some of his ideas remain relevant in relation to currently existing social structures. This primarily applies to situations of inter-class conflicts, clashes and class struggle to change the conditions for the distribution of resources. In this regard, Marx's teaching on class struggle currently has a large number of followers among sociologists and political scientists in many countries of the world.

In societies with low levels of economic inequality, people feel more prosperous and happy, said a professor of sociology at the School of Humanities and Social Sciences at Jacobs University (Bremen, Germany) Ian Delhay at the Fourth International Seminar of the Laboratory of Comparative Social Research of the National Research University Higher School of Economics

Until recently, sociologists did not see a clear connection between the prevailing economic inequality in the country and the subjective feeling of happiness or unhappiness by its citizens, said Ian Delhay. Then it turned out that, for example, Europeans feel less happy in a situation of inequality.

There are several explanations for their rejection of inequality: the associated increase in mutual distrust, increasing concern about their economic status, and worries about ripening social conflicts. This problem was addressed by Ian Delhay in an article published in the journal European Sociological Review .

The starting point for Delhay’s research was a new approach in modern sociology, according to which in prosperous countries the subjective perception of the quality of life depends not so much on indicators of economic growth, but on the presence of inequality, which is regarded as a social disease. Moreover, greater equality has a positive impact on both the poor and the rich. For “left-wing intellectuals” this immediately became a new credo, while right-wing liberal circles were rather skeptical about the new idea.

Equality as a factor of well-being

Ian Delhay sought to understand why social equality is perceived by people as a significant factor in well-being. Or more precisely, what exactly psychologically “mediates” this connection. Such a connecting link can be the level of trust in society, the predictability and goodwill of people’s attitudes towards each other.

Thus, if a person accumulates experience associated with the unpredictability of the actions of others, their unreliability and unkindness, the level of trust drops. As social inequality deepens, this happens much more often.

In addition, strong inequality prevents the development of a sense of community, the feeling that everyone has similar values. This also reduces mutual trust.

Another connecting link may be, as inequality increases, people’s concern about their inconsistency with the “social ideal” accepted in society. This negatively affects their self-confidence, self-esteem and self-esteem. At the heart of “status anxiety” is a question that people constantly ask themselves: “What do we think others think of us?” And this is not a fear of actually sliding down the social ladder, but a concern about how other people perceive their status.

Social conflicts are antagonistic contradictions between different groups of citizens caused by the uneven distribution of income and social benefits. As inequality in society deepens, so does exploitation, confrontation and a sense of injustice. Taken together, this makes people feel unwell.

Happiness scale

Ian Delhay analyzed the results of citizen surveys in thirty countries. To measure the subjective “level of happiness,” the sociologist asked respondents to choose a point on a scale from 1 to 10, where one corresponded to the feeling of “very unhappy” and 10 corresponded to “very happy.”

Subjective level of trust was also measured using a 10-point scale, on which one indicated the feeling “you have to be very careful when dealing with people.” Ten denoted the belief that “most people are trustworthy.”

The level of status anxiety was defined differently: respondents responded to two statements:

• “I don’t feel like my values ​​and what I do are recognized by other people”;
• “Some people look down on me because of my job or low income.”

At the same time, their position was projected onto a 5-point scale ranging from “absolutely agree” (1) to “absolutely disagree” (5).

And, finally, the severity of perception of conflicts in society (between the poor and the rich, as well as between ordinary workers and managers) was measured using a 3-point scale on which the subject could place his assessment of the “tension” of relationships in society.

Trust is at risk

The results of the study confirmed that in countries with high inequality, mutual trust decreases. Growing mistrust, in turn, affects citizens’ subjective sense of well-being. So the level of trust does “mediate” the relationship between existing inequality and feelings of well-being.

The same is true for assessing a person's status: noticeable inequality provokes anxiety, which, in turn, makes a person unhappy. But the presence of social conflicts does not affect the subjective feeling of well-being, and this is a rather unexpected result.

Thus, aversion to inequality in prosperous countries is associated precisely with the trust factor. In other words, the most significant factor in the subjective feeling of happiness for residents of prosperous countries is precisely the level of trust in society.

Text from the Unified State Examination

(1) The most deadly boredom was written on the well-fed, shiny face of the gracious sovereign. (2) He had just emerged from the arms of Morpheus after dinner and did not know what to do. (3) I didn’t want to think or yawn... (4) I got tired of reading since time immemorial, it’s too early to go to the theater, I’m too lazy to go for a ride... (5) What to do? (6) How to have fun?

- (7) Some young lady has come! - Yegor reported.

- (8) He’s asking you!

- (9) Young lady? Hm... (10) Who is this?

(11) A pretty brunette quietly entered the office, dressed simply... even very simply. (12) She entered and bowed.
“(13) Sorry,” she began in a trembling treble.
- (14) I, you know... (15) I was told that you... you can only be found at six o’clock...

(16) I... I... the daughter of court councilor Paltsev...

- (17) Very nice! (18) How can I help? (19) Sit down, don’t be shy!

“(20) I came to you with a request...” the young lady continued, awkwardly sitting down and fiddling with her buttons with trembling hands. - (21) I came... to ask you for a ticket for free travel to my homeland. (22) I heard you give... (23) I want to go, but I... I’m not rich... (24) I need to go from St. Petersburg to Kursk...

- Hm... (25) So... (26) Why do you need to go to Kursk? (27) Is there anything you don’t like here?

- (28) No, I like it here. (29) I'm visiting my parents. (30) I haven’t been to them for a long time... (31) Mom, they write, is sick...
- Hm... (32) Do you serve or study here?

(33) And the young lady told where and with whom she served, how much salary she received, how much work there was...

- (34) You served... (35) Yes, sir, it’s impossible to say that your salary was great...

(36) It would be inhumane not to give you a free ticket... Hm... (37) Well, I suppose there’s a little cupid in Kursk, huh? (38) Amurashka... (39) Groom? (40) Are you blushing? (41) Well, well! (42) It's a good thing. (43) Go for yourself. (44) It’s time for you to get married... (45) Who is he?

- (46) In officials.

- (47) It’s a good thing. (48) Go to Kursk... (49) They say that already a hundred miles from Kursk there is a smell of cabbage soup and cockroaches are crawling... (50) Perhaps there is boredom in this Kursk? (51) Take off your hat! (52) Egor, give us some tea!

(53) The young lady, who did not expect such an affectionate welcome, beamed and described to the gracious sovereign all the entertainment in Kursk... (54) She said that she had a brother who was an official, cousins ​​who were high school students... (55) Yegor served tea.

(56) The young lady timidly reached for the glass and, afraid to smack, began to silently swallow...

(57) The gracious sir looked at her and grinned... (58) He no longer felt bored... - (59) Is your fiancé good-looking? - he asked. - (60) How did you get along with him?

(61) The young lady answered both questions with embarrassment. (62) She trustingly moved towards the gracious sovereign and, smiling, told how suitors had wooed her here in St. Petersburg and how she refused them... (63) She ended up taking a letter from her parents from her pocket and reading it to the gracious sovereign. (64) Eight o’clock struck.
- (65) And your father has good handwriting... (66) What squiggles he writes with! (67) Hehe...
:
(68) But, however, I have to go... (69) It has already begun in the theater... (70) Goodbye, Marya Efimovna!
- (71) So can I hope? - asked the young lady, getting up.
- (72) For what?
- (73) If you give me a free ticket...

- (74) Ticket?.. (75) Hm... (76) I don’t have tickets! (77) You must have made a mistake, madam...

(78) He-he-he... (79) You got to the wrong place, at the wrong entrance... there really is some kind of railway worker who lives next to me, and I work in a bank, sir! (80) Egor, tell me to lay it down! (81) Goodbye, Marya Semyonovna! (82) Very glad... very glad...

(83) The young lady got dressed and went out... (84) At another entrance she was told that he left at half past seven for Moscow.

(According to A.P. Chekhov)

Introduction

In life, we often encounter injustice, the disdainful attitude of people who have some kind of power over others. People who are financially secure do not understand the poor, do not consider it necessary to take their opinion into account, and simply do not perceive them as equals. Simple, “little” people become the subject of ridicule and insults from those in power.

A comment

The presented text raises the topic of relationships between people of different classes - a young poor girl asking for money, and a bored “gracious sovereign” who does not know what to do with himself in the coming day.

The girl urgently needs to go home, and she, having heard somewhere that the master was giving out free tickets to everyone in need, came to him for help. He asks for all the details of her personal life, the reasons why she is in such a hurry to Kursk. The “young lady,” in her naivety, shares her hopes and dreams, rejoicing at such a warm welcome. However, in the end it turns out that she was at the wrong entrance, and the “dear sir” was just talking to her out of boredom.

Instead of somehow helping his interlocutor, he leaves. She acted as a kind of toy for the bank employee, and he is not at all worried about her future fate.

Soon the girl learns that the railway worker from the next door is no longer at home. So she is left with nothing.

Topic, problem, idea

In Russian literature, the theme of the little man has become classic. Satirist writers have thought a lot about this, exposing the imperfections of the social structure of our Motherland. A.P. was no exception. Chekhov, who thought a lot about social order, looked closely at many images typical of his time - officials of various ranks, landowners, peasants, the poor, beggars.

The text raises the problem of social inequality, in other words, the problem of the little man.

Author's position

Chekhov clearly has a negative attitude towards the “gracious sir.” This can be seen already from the first phrase of the text, which talks about “a well-fed, shiny face.” The girl, on the contrary, evokes sympathy from the author. Her descriptions are pleasant, without caricature: “pretty brunette”, “fiddle with her buttons with trembling hands.” We can say that Chekhov stands on the side of the “little people” who are afraid of everything in life, and condemns the inhumanity of the highest circles.

Your position

I really want to agree with the author, because, knowing all the life difficulties of the young brunette, the bank employee could at least give her money, if it didn’t work out with the ticket. The trouble is that rich people are looking for benefit in everything only for themselves, and the environment around them does not bother them. They seem to be dead internally. Chekhov, in my opinion, by raising this problem, wants to shake up society, force people of high rank to look at themselves from the outside.

Arguments and examples

The topic of social inequality, the relationship of the poor with the rich, and people without rights with people of high status has been repeatedly raised in literature.

F.M. Dostoevsky in his novel “Crime and Punishment” presents a gallery of people who are beyond the poverty line. The main plot action begins precisely in the clash between a poor student and an old money-lender who profits from the misfortunes of other poor people.

Poverty drives Raskolnikov to thoughts of murder. By this action, he seems to be trying to prove to himself that he is not a simple “little man” who is not able to influence anything, but “has the right” - deciding the destinies of people.

I think that such a terrible act by Raskolnikov was initially caused by his desire to save the people around him from social injustice in the person of his grandmother-pawnbroker.

There are many examples in real life. According to statistics, more than half of the Russian population lives in very difficult living conditions, often without work, without money and, in fact, without rights. Remember how many homeless people froze to death on the street last winter, how many sick grandparents live in landfills. The worst thing is that it is very difficult for them to get out of poverty, because others do not respect them and consider them people without a future.

Conclusion

Unfortunately, as long as people in society are divided into rich and poor, as long as social inequality flourishes, there will be a place for callousness, immorality, and indifference in our society. However, I would like to believe that people will become kinder and more tolerant of each other, because we are all equal before God!