The streets of London and New York City are a study in contrasts. Luxury high-rises and designer boutiques in some areas cast alien figures when viewed from the rundown housing projects and shuttered small businesses on the other side of town. Behind the gleaming skyscrapers and bustling streets, many citizens, in full employment, perhaps even with more than one job struggle to make ends meet. The economic system seems rigged against them, with wealth and power concentrated in the hands of a privileged few.

In the UK, millions of people are struggling with the cost of living, with many relying on food banks to get by, while the richest 1% hold more wealth than the bottom 50% combined. The situation is no better in the US, where the richest 400 people possess more wealth than the bottom 60% of the population. Yes, you heard that right, the richest 400 people in the US possess more wealth than 204 million Americans.

This isn’t just morally troubling – it’s also economically disastrous. When the majority of citizens lack the purchasing power to drive demand, economies stagnate, and everything shrinks back. So try throwing to that broken equation an Economics illiterate president who begins to take huge risks with public policy. And you have at your hands a catastrophe!

The consequences are stark. Life expectancy in the US has been declining for years now, and the opioid addiction has ravaged communities, mostly the poor. In the UK, the NHS groans under the weight of austerity, while private Healthcare flourishes. The message is clear: those with money and influence will continue to get the care they need, while everyone else is left to fight for scraps. In long NHS waiting lists. Or seated for hours and hours in the A & E department.

Globally, many countries are struggling to balance their books and the instability in the US will only make things worse. Forget the cuts to USAID, the real drama will happen when developing countries realise their exports will not be bringing in anywhere near enough revenue as before this year. And that there aren’t many funders out there willing to plug that deficit reasonably cheaply.

At that point, the state’s credit card would have been maxed out.

Some might argue that policies like Tariffs can help protect local industries and jobs. However, as seen in Trump’s tariff policy, such measures often backfire. Higher tariffs can lead to higher prices for consumers, damaging the very industries they’re meant to protect. Moreover, tariffs can spark trade wars, undermining economic stability and growth. And in the case of the US and China Tariff war, the consequences will be felt globally.

Further, for each industry with high Tariffs, it will take years for manufacturing facilities to catch up with demand and be established within the US. And so up to that time, consumers, not just poor people, will be affected. As Richard Branson, founder of Virgin Group, noted regarding Trump’s tariffs recently, “Everything was going so bloody well… now it’s all messed up.”

But if you think about it, the real problem has always been inequality. And looking closely, what you’ll see is that the economic damage isn’t limited to the economies of western countries. Inequality actually erodes the foundations of democracy, allowing the wealthy to exert disproportionate influence over policy and lawmaking, often pushing for policies that disenfranchise those on low wages. So, Jeff Bezos & Mark Zuckerberg will want weak labour laws and low levels of regulation, whereas oil companies will push for weaker Climate Action, helped by lobby groups such as the American Petroleum Institute. But it’s as much the citizens of the US and the UK, who will suffer as a result, not just those remote communities in the Congo basin, or places like that, where the effects of Climate Change is being felt most strongly, and where the labour laws aren’t as strong.

But what’s the solution to tackling inequality?

The solution lies in recognising that extreme wealth is no longer a price worth paying for economic growth. We need policies that prioritise human rights and the well-being of the majority over the interests of the ultra-rich. In any case, the wealth that these companies and individuals possess is only possible because of the economic conditions that various governments have created over decades. Wealth doesn’t accumulate in a vacuum. So, policies that implement progressive taxation, investing in public services, and promoting collective bargaining to boost workers’ rights need to find centre ground.
The Earth4All initiative’s research for example shows that reducing inequality isn’t just a moral imperative but an economic necessity. By working to create fair policies that generate wealth for all, the world will be able to create more resilient economies across the world which serve the many, not just the few. And the result is that the world will not be vulnerable to the economic shocks of large economic powers. In 2025, the rest of the world should not catch “a cold” when the US or China “sneezes”.

So, the question remains: which of the current leaders will take action and begin charting a path that drastically reduces global inequality? Because looking at the way things are going, the future of our societies hangs in the balance if no decisive action is taken. And even rich countries are now equally vulnerable.