The Rich and Poor + In Between

The rich get richer, the poor get poorer, the majority of us fall somewhere in between.

As I said in my previous post, there are valid reasons that can be generally applied to American society as to why this statement is true.  Yes there are exceptions to this generalization - but for the most part, it holds true.  Rather than argue this point, consider the following.

If economic status was governed by the same rules that steer evolution, the disparities between the rich and the poor would begin to eliminate themselves.  In an ideal world, someone who was poor and underprivileged without the ability or skills to elevate their socioeconomic status would also not be able to sustain a quality of life that would be conducive to reproduction and child-rearing.  A lack of adequate resources would spell certain death for any offspring and the chain of DNA would end.  This is evolution.  This is how the earth has "lived" for millions of years.  Although cold and harsh from a human perspective, without it, our existence as intelligent beings would quite possibly never have come to fruition.  Evolution is built into our DNA.  In the long run, I think evolution will win out over human intelligence - but in the short term, we sure seem to be giving it a run for its money.

Humanity, and therefore, society interferes with evolution by way of religion, government, health care, or other aid-bearing or life-altering entities that enable the weak to survive right alongside the strong.  So is it humanity, then, that dictates that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer?  Is it humanity that seems to infinitely spawn the need for more humanity?  Would you not agree that if it wasn't for humanity than life would carry on as it has for millions of years - only allowing the strong to survive? 

Look at the man or woman who greets you at Wal-Mart.  Think about the nice man that bags your groceries.  Think of that person that isn't so bright and sometimes makes you wonder how they make it around in life.  Our instinct via conditioning urges us to be compassionate to the less fortunate, offering charity and love so that they may enjoy life as you and I do.  Now look at them through the eyes of evolution.  In the end, most of us end up looking out for our own well-being.  But bureaucracies, government, and societies are not human beings that are hard-coded with the will to survive.  It is in these entities that humanity and compassion can take on entirely different forms that will likely end up causing more harm than good. 

Evolution tells us why the rich get richer, but why do the poor get poorer?  Would evolution just put them out of their misery?  Perhaps evolution is more humanitarian seeing as how it would prevent suffering, eliminating the possibility for the poor to get poorer.  Perhaps the poor get poorer because we try too hard to help them better their selves?