Angus Deaton's NBER Working Paper explores the relationship between income inequality and health in both poor and rich countries. He discusses various mechanisms, including nonlinear income effects, credit restrictions, nutritional traps, public goods provision, and relative deprivation. The paper reviews evidence on the effects of income inequality on mortality trends, geographical mortality patterns, and individual mortality. Deaton concludes that there is no direct link between income inequality and ill-health; individuals are no more likely to die in more unequal places. He argues that raw correlations may result from factors other than income inequality, some of which are linked to broader notions of inequality and unfairness. While income inequality itself is not a health risk, other inequalities and the social environment are important for health. Whether income redistribution can improve population health remains an open question. The paper explores theoretical and empirical bases for the connection between inequality and health, considering both poor and rich countries. It discusses the absolute income hypothesis, which suggests that income matters more for health among the poor. It also examines the relative income hypothesis, which posits that health depends on income relative to others. The paper considers the effects of income on investments in health and education, the two-way link between nutrition and earnings, and the possible negative effects of inequality on the political process's ability to deliver public goods. It also considers the evolutionary history's predisposition towards fairness and the negative effects of living in unequal environments. The paper reviews evidence from developed economies, including cross-country studies on adult and child mortality. It notes that the quality of international data on income distribution is often low, making it difficult to draw reliable inferences. However, within-country data and studies across areas in developed countries provide more interesting evidence. The paper concludes that there is no direct link between income inequality and ill-health, and that factors other than income inequality may explain correlations in the data. The paper also discusses the importance of other inequalities and the social environment for health. It argues that income redistribution may improve population health, but the relationship between income inequality and health remains an open question.Angus Deaton's NBER Working Paper explores the relationship between income inequality and health in both poor and rich countries. He discusses various mechanisms, including nonlinear income effects, credit restrictions, nutritional traps, public goods provision, and relative deprivation. The paper reviews evidence on the effects of income inequality on mortality trends, geographical mortality patterns, and individual mortality. Deaton concludes that there is no direct link between income inequality and ill-health; individuals are no more likely to die in more unequal places. He argues that raw correlations may result from factors other than income inequality, some of which are linked to broader notions of inequality and unfairness. While income inequality itself is not a health risk, other inequalities and the social environment are important for health. Whether income redistribution can improve population health remains an open question. The paper explores theoretical and empirical bases for the connection between inequality and health, considering both poor and rich countries. It discusses the absolute income hypothesis, which suggests that income matters more for health among the poor. It also examines the relative income hypothesis, which posits that health depends on income relative to others. The paper considers the effects of income on investments in health and education, the two-way link between nutrition and earnings, and the possible negative effects of inequality on the political process's ability to deliver public goods. It also considers the evolutionary history's predisposition towards fairness and the negative effects of living in unequal environments. The paper reviews evidence from developed economies, including cross-country studies on adult and child mortality. It notes that the quality of international data on income distribution is often low, making it difficult to draw reliable inferences. However, within-country data and studies across areas in developed countries provide more interesting evidence. The paper concludes that there is no direct link between income inequality and ill-health, and that factors other than income inequality may explain correlations in the data. The paper also discusses the importance of other inequalities and the social environment for health. It argues that income redistribution may improve population health, but the relationship between income inequality and health remains an open question.