1) With the perspective that this feature of how society operates can and should be changed; 2) With the perspective that this is simply how society works and you can adapt or die.
Either can be viewed as more tractable than the other (probably quite correctly depending on one's circumstances).
To adopt the former approach may mean that you are faced with the dilemma of whether or not to override the rights of detractors and those who disagree.
Even if you adopt the second approach, you may encounter a similar dilemma, e.g. you will decide to order your shoes from a company with operations in a third world nation paying lower local wages, or buy via Amazon despite reservations about their practices.
Whatever approach is adopted, awareness of what choices exist and what consequences they bring will be required.
To develop the tools that will enable this awareness and measurement is a massive problem on its own because of the complexity of interrelated systems, events, consequences and disparate interests. It may not even be possible.
But when there is no objective or even widely accepted 'true north' for decision making, the trend to deepening inequality is likely to continue.