Is nepotism another name for parenting?

"Is income inequality always a bad thing?" asked A Schrager. Income inequality has been rising in the UK and US since the 1980s. Poor people spend most of their earnings on daily expenses, so consumption drops if they earn less, which is harmful, and they will vote for populism, which explains Brexit and victory for Donald Trump. What is inequality? Is it just a matter of who earns more? Apparently people agree that those who work harder should be rewarded more. What they resent is unfairness. They want equal opportunities and equal pay for the same work. Richard Reeves has written a book in which he blames the top 20%, not just the top 1%, for inequality, wrote M Konczal. He says that the upper middle class, mainly professional classes, are "hoarding" opportunities for their children by getting them into good schools, elite colleges and unpaid internships. Reeves wants to see more downward mobility in which children end up being worse off than their parents. Does it mean that parents should deliberately deny their children so as to make them poorer? A study from the London School of Economics showed that middle class parents spend more time and money on their children, train them in 'soft skills' and use their networks to get them better opportunities than more deserving children from poorer homes. Children from poorer families need more tuition and other support to bring up to the same level as their richer peers but who is going to fund this extra attention. Bollywood actress, Kangana Ranaut is incensed at the nepotism in the Bollywood film industry where children of previous film stars get preference in starring roles in new films. Financing of films is a very risky affair with huge losses if a film bombs at the box office. Isn't it natural that people will want to take such risk with their money on their own children than on someone they do not know? N Smith wrote that, "Populist attacks on elites are a dead end", because inequality is relative. To someone who is poor a lower middle class person is rich, while for a rich person only the super rich are above them. As long there is fair distribution inequality is not a bad thing. Prof K Basu wrote that the wealthy often pay less for services than the poor and have the ability to reduce their taxes by employing accountants. So, inequality is bad. But what to do about it? A study by the Roosevelt Institute suggests that a universal basic income will grow the economy, increase employment and make society more equal if the amount is raised from taxes. Will people work if they are assured of a universal basic income? Trouble is that once started no politician will dare to stop it. So, it will probably not happen.