Inequality within arbitrary borders is important because economic environments, and therefore effects on individuals, are still defined by those arbitrary borde

Inequality within arbitrary borders is important because economic environments, and therefore effects on individuals, are still defined by those arbitrary borders. AFAIK, it matters very little to my daily life or even to my two decade outlook what happens to wealth inequality within, say, Rwanda. But it matters very much that increasing wealth inequality (and consequent pricing phenomena) in the Bay area is driving away critical infrastructure operators. People upon whom my community depends: teachers, firefighters, police, sewage treatment operators, water company employees, ambulance drivers, road maintenance workers - the people who provide the necessities that sustain my community - are being driven away by increasing wealth inequality. They're priced out of living within (now) about 2.5 hours from where they work. In my value system, this is not good. Not for them, for me, or for my neighbors (some of whom must leave due to property tax increases). Global statistics aren't useful in understanding local effects. Each community, whatever the particular definition of community may be, is at the mercy of what happens to it and those communities upon which it depends. I get that globally, humanity is making real progress in quality of life. And I'm very glad for that. But like the future, I see that it's not evenly distributed. We should work on that.