Persistent poverty and economic inequality are features of American society. In turn, they shape people’s engagement with the legal system. People experiencing poverty end up in housing court facing evictions, in criminal court facing charges for crimes of desperation, in small claims court facing debt collection, and in family court facing removal of their children. Yet the rules of evidence generally erase the facts of poverty and social class in trials. Sometimes this is salutary by removing the prejudice a party can face simply for being poor in a supposed meritocracy. Yet it is impossible to “erase” the bias poor people can face in court because their social class is obvious through other cues. Moreover, the relevance rules exacerbate the effects of poverty by masking economic injustice and thereby dampening calls for collective action.

This chapter critically examines the widespread assumption that belief in free will is pragmatically beneficial for society. While some researchers argue that disbelief in free will leads to antisocial behavior, reduced moral responsibility, and societal dysfunction, the chapter challenges these claims by highlighting methodological flaws and replication failures in the relevant studies. The author argues that the supposed benefits of belief in free will are overstated and cannot justify maintaining it as a “noble fiction.” The second half of the chapter explores a more troubling consequence: the moral and political costs of believing in free will. Drawing on empirical research from psychology and political science, the author shows that belief in free will correlates with increased punitiveness, reduced empathy, stronger belief in a just world, and greater acceptance of economic inequality. These views coalesce into what the author calls the “just deserts cluster,” which sustains systems of blame and punishment by presuming individuals deserve their lot in life. In contrast, adopting free will skepticism is shown to promote compassion, humility, and social justice by recognizing the role of luck and systemic factors in shaping human behavior. The chapter lays the groundwork for a moral reorientation grounded in realism and empathy.

Lives are comprised of the stories we tell. At the beginning of this chapter, I argue for the importance of understanding how narratives not only mirror but also shape our understanding of ourselves and others. I draw on classic and contemporary research in social and cultural psychology to show how narratives are remembered and transformed over time and between people. I also discuss master narratives – dominant stories that help create shared understanding and cohesion in societies. I then introduce two dominant master narratives concerning economic development. The first highlights growing inequality and its detrimental impact on societies. The second emphasizes that, despite the vices of capitalism, economic growth has led to increased prosperity. I situate these narratives in the contemporary political and academic zeitgeist, where inequality dominates. I end the chapter by discussing the moral imperative to alleviate global poverty, create fairer societies, and pursue human capabilities as a guide for rethinking economic development.

I start this chapter by briefly describing three possibilities for the future of capitalism and economic inequality. The first is that the rich continue to get richer; the second is a polar opposite approach that seeks to create economic equality at all costs; and the third involves the possibility of multiple forms of capitalism. Each possibility is explored in the next three chapters. In the remainder of this chapter, I explain why it is important to chart possibilities: doing so helps us understand potential paths forward and can meaningfully guide us toward the forms most congruent with our wishes. This world-making approach to psychology draws on theorizing around the psychology of imagination, which I develop here. I also return to value pluralism to help frame our understanding of the three futures that comprise Part III.

I provide an overview of the book in this introductory chapter. The scope, limits, and style of the book are outlined. I introduce a central tension: that humanity has never been so prosperous, yet it often feels to many of us as though we never have enough. The view from manywheres is a central organizing principle in the book. The idea is to stay on the move between multiple disciplines, methods, and perspectives to comprehensively understand economic inequality. From this holistic view, I articulate a new vision for economic development – one based on the alleviation of poverty, the creation of fairness in our shared economic systems, and the pursuit and achievement of human capabilities.

I present the first of three possibilities for the future of economic development and inequality. In this scenario, the rich continue to get richer, leaving the rest of us behind. I describe four implications of this continued concentration of wealth. First, the super-rich will continue to disproportionately influence politics, furthering fragmentation and polarization in society and deepening civic discontent. Second, economic inequality will amplify ill-health. Third, poverty will persist despite increased aggregate prosperity. Fourth, the climate will continue to deteriorate to our collective detriment. This dystopian possibility underscores the urgency of imagining and pursuing alternative futures.

I begin this chapter by discussing people’s subjective and psychological interpretations of objective economic realities. I present social psychological evidence suggesting that people frequently misinterpret economic realities. I then present evidence from multiple sources illustrating the key point of the chapter: that the rich are getting richer. These data are from Our World in Data and are presented to illustrate how income and wealth inequality in Western neoliberal societies, and throughout the world, wax and wane over time. I critically assess the realities behind these figures and delve into the complexities behind changing patterns of economic inequality. I end the chapter by discussing the ways in which rising levels of contemporary income and wealth inequalities have permeated contemporary political realities.

Standard economic reasoning makes a compelling case for taxing on a lifetime (or even multigenerational) scale, instead of annually. But, in addition to practical problems, lifetime accounting raises serious philosophical challenges and objections. The question of the relevant time period over which to distribute tax (and other fiscal) benefits and burdens is fundamental in a number of areas. Among them are the longstanding debate about income versus consumption taxation, the equity of retirement programmes, and the progressivity of various countries’ fiscal systems.

In China, the public has gradually shifted its focus from GDP growth to quality-of-life issues, presenting new challenges for the government. Food safety, as a prominent concern, exemplifies this shift. This chapter examines the impact of food safety issues on ordinary Chinese citizens’ trust in the government and their perceptions of governmental responsibility. The findings indicate that food safety problems diminish public trust in both central and local governments; however, this negative effect is mitigated among individuals with lower levels of education. Furthermore, the Chinese public is inclined to attribute primary responsibility for food safety crises to the central government rather than local authorities when assessing the severity of these issues. These results highlight the political implications of food safety concerns in China.

The past few decades have witnessed a significant religious revival in China, coinciding with a sharp increase in economic inequality. This chapter investigates the impact of religion on the Chinese public’s perceptions of income disparity and political trust. The findings reveal a notable difference in the perceived fairness of personal income distribution between religious and nonreligious individuals. Religious beliefs are positively correlated with a heightened sense of fairness regarding both personal and national income distribution. These perceptions of fairness, in turn, contribute to fostering people’s trust in political institutions and government officials. However, religious beliefs mitigate the positive effect of perceived fairness in income distribution on institutional trust. Consequently, when income distribution is perceived as unfair, institutional trust declines more sharply among religious believers compared to their nonreligious counterparts.

The last chapter is the Conclusion. After a brief overview of the book’s key themes, topics, and arguments, the chapter places India in a comparative perspective and asks the following questions. How analogous are political and economic trends in India when compared to similar countries? How do India’s achievements and shortcomings discussed in the book stand up against some other comparable countries?