Does Inequality Matter If Everyone Gets Richer?
早見表
1A familiar defense of economic inequality goes like this: if the economy grows and everyone becomes better off, it does not matter that some people gain much more than others. What counts, according to this view, is that living standards rise for all, not how the gains are shared. The argument has a certain appeal, since it points to a real achievement: many goods that were once luxuries are now available to ordinary households.
2Yet this defense overlooks the fact that people live not only in absolute terms but also in relation to one another. When the gap between the wealthy and the rest grows very wide, it can change the way society works. Families with more resources can buy better education, healthcare, and connections for their children, so that opportunities are passed down rather than earned. A child born into a poor household may work just as hard as one born into a rich one, yet face very different prospects, and the difference is not a matter of talent. Over time, this weakens the belief that effort is rewarded, and a society in which that belief is lost tends to lose trust in its institutions.
3There is also a political dimension. Those with great wealth may find it easier to influence the rules that govern everyone, from taxation to regulation. Public debate, too, can be shaped by those who own the means of communication. Even if no one acts dishonestly, the perception that the system favors the few can lead ordinary citizens to feel that their voices no longer matter. Economic disparity thus becomes a question not only of income but also of democratic legitimacy.
4It would be a mistake, however, to conclude that the best solution is to make everyone's income equal. Differences in reward can encourage people to take risks, to learn new skills, and to create new businesses, and policies that ignore these incentives may reduce the wealth available to share. The real difficulty is to find a balance: enough difference to motivate effort, but not so much that opportunity itself becomes unequal.
5What, then, should be done? There is no single answer, but ideas such as broad access to education and fair taxation deserve consideration. Whatever measures are chosen, the underlying principle should be that prosperity is judged not only by how large the economy grows, but also by how widely its benefits are shared. This is not a call for envy, but for attention to the conditions that allow everyone to take part in the economy and in public life.
| 役割 | 内容(日本語で) |
|---|---|
| 主張 | |
| 根拠 | |
| 具体例 | |
| 譲歩・反論 | |
| 結論 |
次の英文を150字以内の日本語で要約しなさい。

Summarize the passage in about 70 words in English.
| 3の要約に入っていれば得点(採点ポイント) | 配点 | 得点 |
|---|---|---|
| 全員が豊かになれば格差は問題でないという擁護には、生活水準の向上という実績に基づく魅力がある。 | 1 | |
| 人は他者との相対的な位置でも生きており、格差が大きいと機会が受け継がれ、努力が報われるという信頼が損なわれる。 | 3 | |
| 富の偏りは政治への影響力を通じて、民主主義の正統性にも関わる。 | 2 | |
| 完全な平等は意欲を損なうので、意欲を保ちつつ機会が不平等にならない均衡が必要だ。 | 2 | |
| 繁栄は経済の規模だけでなく、恩恵がどれだけ広く共有されるかで判断すべきだ。 | 3 | |
| 合計 | 11 |
タイトルの意味
全員が豊かになれば格差は問題でないか
1 文章の組み立て
- 主張:全員が豊かになっても格差は無視できず、繁栄は恩恵がどれだけ広く共有されるかでも判断すべきだ。
- 根拠:格差が大きいと機会が受け継がれ、努力が報われるという信頼が弱まり、政治への影響力を通じて民主主義の正統性にも関わる。
- 具体例:資源のある家庭が教育や医療、人脈を子に与える(省略してよい)。
- 譲歩・反論:全員が豊かになればよいという擁護には実績という魅力があり、完全な平等は意欲を損なう恐れもある。
- 結論:意欲と機会の平等の均衡を探り、教育の機会や公正な課税などを検討する。
2 語句
1-c 2-e 3-d 4-b 5-f 6-a
- inequality 不平等、格差
- disparity 格差、隔たり
- opportunity 機会
- incentive 動機づけ、誘因
- legitimacy 正統性
- prosperity 繁栄
3 模範解答(日本語)
全員が豊かになれば格差は問題でないという擁護には一理あるが、格差が大きいと機会が受け継がれ、努力への信頼や民主主義の正統性が損なわれる。ただし完全な平等は意欲を削ぐので、意欲と機会の平等の均衡が要る。繁栄は経済の規模だけでなく、恩恵がどれだけ広く共有されるかでも測るべきだ。
4 Model summary
Some argue that inequality is harmless if everyone grows richer, but wide gaps pass opportunities down, weaken trust that effort is rewarded, and, through political influence, threaten democratic legitimacy. Complete equality would reduce incentives, so a balance between motivation and equal opportunity is needed. Prosperity should be judged not only by the size of the economy but also by how widely its benefits are shared.
削ってよい部分
- かつて贅沢品だった物が一般家庭に行き渡ったという例
- 教育・医療・人脈を子に買い与えるという例
- 教育の機会や公正な課税という具体策
よくあるミス
- 冒頭の「格差は問題でない」という擁護を筆者の意見として書くと逆の要約になります。「Yet」以降が筆者の立場だと確認しましょう。
- 「全員の収入を平等にすべき」と結論づける誤りがあります。筆者は完全な平等を否定し、意欲と機会のバランスを求めています。
- 所得の話だけにして、政治的側面(民主主義の正統性)を落とすと論点が半分欠けます。「機会」と「民主主義」の2点を入れましょう。
5 意見の採点のめやす(10点)
- 立場が明確 2点/理由が本文を踏まえている 4点
- 具体例 2点/英語の正確さ 2点
WPM のめやす
共通テストを時間内に解くには 120〜150WPM、難関大の長文なら 150 以上をめざしたい。