On the whole, this may be true but there are available diverse methods of making inequality more tolerable, many rather independent of growth. If growth soothes

On the whole, this may be true but there are available diverse methods of making inequality more tolerable, many rather independent of growth. If growth soothes covetousness, it is only in a way subject to hedonic treadmill effects. But, education, meditation, medication, censorship and many other tactics could lessen such effects in ways not necessarily subject to diminishing returns. For example, one can look at these photos in many different ways: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/income-inequality-los-angeles-jeffrey-milstein_55c0c7d7e4b0b23e3ce3f8a4?utm_hp_ref=income-inequality&kvcommref=mostpopular http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/income-inequality-los-an... From such a distance, a trailer like the one I was born in does not seem much smaller than a mansion. None of this was around in the year 1491. If I had the only building, say, a trailer, in the state of Wyoming, and then someone builds a mansion that I can see, it does NOT necessarily follow that I suffer more. Besides, never forget, growth is always what creates inequality in the first place. Before the seeds sprout, bean plants are of equal height, and it is nigh impossible to keep them equal in height, although with sophisticated bioengineering or grafting techniques it may be possible. Cognitive processes, possibly exacerbated by the consumption of deleterious media, can induce suffering in humans at any level of wealth; many are brought to deepest anguish because they cannot live forever, they can believe that "reality is broken" because they maladapt their motivation systems to video games (I'm talking about me here), etc. Income is becoming more and more equal; some people are upset because this is happening across national borders and think they deserve more pay for the same work because of their birthplace, but I think this is ultimately untenable—it is natural that we are in anguish because our cost-of-living is higher, but it is getting harder and harder to starve. Once we have our daily bread, toleration of life is somewhat up to us. I think the starkest problem with inequality is the often subconscious worry about attracting a mate, even in those with no intention of procreation. Perhaps this downward pressure on birth rates is unavoidable as carrying capacity is met or exceeded. As for the fear that the economy must grow or collapse, many economies have shrunk before. Surely, I must admit one could define collapse so as to make "The economy must grow or collapse" a true statement.