Inequality of wealth comes from equality in greed.

"Why would economists rather talk about inefficiency than inequality?" asked N Smith. Probably because economists do not want to be caught in politics. So they look for Pareto improvement in which one person's economic condition maybe improved without harming anyone else. Unfortunately, it does not work in real life because people compete with others out of envy. A recent paper by Agarwal, Mikhed and Scholnick studied reactions of neighbors when someone won a lottery. Neighbors of those who won a big prize borrowed more and suffered more bankruptcies than neighbors of those who won small amounts. This behavior may explain how financial bubbles build up. If someone sells his house for a big profit it encourages others to buy houses, thus pushing prices up. It is also why social schemes, where the government distributes subsidies to the poor, are resented by those who do are left out of such subsidies. However, inequality is real. The top 1% of global population holds 50% of the wealth of the world while the bottom 3.5 billion share just 2.7% of global wealth. In India it is even worse, as the top 1% earned 73% of the wealth generated in the country last year. Inequality of earnings is not the same as inequality of wealth which is a result of accumulation over years, and even over generations. For instance, the top 5% of households in the US held 62.5% of all assets in 2013 but earned only 30% of total income. Inequality is already having adverse political effects around the world. "Economic insecurity is the driving force behind violent conflicts in the Middle East and the rise of fascist elements in some European countries, not least Hungary and Poland," wrote Prof K Basu. He wrote that a lot of people get wealthy due to luck. Luck determines who your parents are, what education you get and who you might meet. A World Bank study on educational mobility in India, China, Indonesia, Nigeria, Egypt and Brazil found that India has the worst mobility of all. Educational mobility depends heavily on the level of education of parents. It is not difficult to understand why. Educated parents can help children with their studies and general knowledge. Highly educated parents also tend to earn a lot more and so can afford better schools. Higher education will become even more valuable as the knowledge society evolves. However, "Under current conditions, pushing for absolute equality could erode the incentive to work, leading to widespread economic breakdown." The rich in the US suggest a Universal Basic Income wherein the government will transfer a sum of money to all households. Although there is support for such a scheme, conservatives worry that it will promote laziness, while liberals think that it will encourage employers to reduce wages. In India, those who are already benefiting from handouts will not want to give them up and will demand payments in addition to what they already get. The poor are no less greedy than the rich. We are all human after all.