Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Conclusion on inequality for all
The economic impact of globalization on the U.S
Effects of globalization on us
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Conclusion on inequality for all
The film I chose was Inequality for All. It’s a documentary about the declining wage-earning ability of the American middle class, as described through a series of lectures by Robert Reich, a former labor secretary under President Bill Clinton. It includes charts and graphs and at least one scene in which an economist points at a computer screen and talks about IRS tax data.
The first time Reich met Clinton was when he became terribly sea sick, during a Rhodes Scholarship cruise in 1968. He left the Clinton administration in 1996 because he felt like he was making no progress with him and he wanted to spend more time with his children. Since then, he became an economics professor at the University of California at Berkeley.
According to Reich, the country’s housing crisis, recession, and slow recovery—and even the political standoffs in Washington—can be traced back to 1978. This was the time that income inequality started to rise more and more. This was due to many factors such as the rise of globalization and shrinking union membership,
During 1978 Reich showed how the average male worker earned $48,000 when in 2010 they earned $33,000. The top one percent earned $390,00 rising to $1.1
…show more content…
During the film they interviewed a struggling Costco employee who makes $21.50 an hour and can barely afford to support her family. It also features Nick Hanauer, the very compassionate billionaire who witnesses that his feather pillow company relies on a middle-class customer base. “Even the richest people sleep on one or two pillows,” he says. It is nice to know that some of the wealthy understand that they need a strong middle class and there are some that know they don’t spend even close to what they make a year. They will put a lot of this money into a savings account. Most rich people are saving too much of their money that it’s not making the economy trickle down like it
Leading up to the year 1981, America had fallen into a period of “stagflation”, a portmanteau for ‘stagnant economy’ and ‘high inflation’. Characterized by high taxes, high unemployment, high interest rates, and low national spirit, America needed to look to something other than Keynesian economics to pull itself out of this low. During the election of 1980, Ronald Reagan’s campaign focused on a new stream of economic policy. His objective was to turn the economy into “a healthy, vigorous, growing economy [which would provide] equal opportunities for all Americans, with no barriers born of bigotry or discrimination.” Reagan’s policy, later known as ‘Reaganomics’, entailed a four-point plan which cut taxes, reduced government spending, created anti-inflationary policy, and deregulated certain products. Though ‘Reaganomics’ was successful both at controlling “stagflation” and promoting economic growth, it has and always will be an extremely controversial topic regarding the redistribution of wealth.
While she was working the minimum wage life she would talk about the rich as selfish people who struck luck and got all their money that way. She says, “ Since the rich have become more numerous, thanks largely to rising stock prices and executive salaries” (Ehrenreich 109). She explains that the rich are becoming more numerous as a result of stocks and executive salaries growing. The New York Times says, "Data Reveal a Rise in College Degrees Among Americans” (Rampell 1). The article says that more and more Americans are earning college degrees over the years. This is the reason why the successful are
When President Reagan took office, the U.S. was on the back end of the economic prosperity World War 2 had created. The U.S. was experiencing the highest inflation rates since 1947 (13.6% in 1980), unemployment rates reaching 10% in 1982, and nonexistent increases GDP. To combat the recession the country was experiencing, President Reagan implemented the beginning stages of trickle down economics – which was a short-term solution aimed to stimulate the economy. Taxes in the top bracket dropped from 70% to 28% while GDP recovered. However, this short-term growth only masked the real problem at hand.
Smith, Noah. “How to Fix America's Wealth Inequality: Teach Americans to Be Cheap.” The Atlantic. Atlantic Pub., 12 March 2013. Web. 06 April 2014. .
During the 1920’s, America was a prosperous nation going through the “Big Boom” and loving every second of it. However, this fortune didn’t last long, because with the 1930’s came a period of serious economic recession, a period called the Great Depression. By 1933, a quarter of the nation’s workers (about 40 million) were without jobs. The weekly income rate dropped from $24.76 per week in 1929 to $16.65 per week in 1933 (McElvaine, 8). After President Hoover failed to rectify the recession situation, Franklin D. Roosevelt began his term with the hopeful New Deal. In two installments, Roosevelt hoped to relieve short term suffering with the first, and redistribution of money amongst the poor with the second. Throughout these years of the depression, many Americans spoke their minds through pen and paper. Many criticized Hoover’s policies of the early Depression and praised the Roosevelts’ efforts. Each opinion about the causes and solutions of the Great Depression are based upon economic, racial and social standing in America.
Downs has sought to dispel myths surrounding housing policy. The first myth he debunks is the myth that all government-sponsored urban policies have failed. Downs believes that although they had resulted in greater hardships for poorer neighborhoods, the policies have given great benefits to a majority of urban American families. While he does not consider these policies to be a complete success, he refuses to call them failures due to the fact that they did indeed improve the standard of living for most of urban America. Downs also calls to our attention the effect of housing policies on the number of housing units. Starting in 1950, housing policies were aimed at ending the housing shortage until focus was shifted to low income households in the midst of the Vietnam War. To Downs, ending the shortage was important because it was affecting the American way of life. Couples were delaying marriage, extended families were living in one home, and overcrowded housing led to overcrowded local facilities, such as schools. Downs also argues that this overcrowding led to an inescapable cycle of “substandard”
One of the studies that he included is on the percent of household income going to the richest one percent. In this study it showed that in 1979 7.5% of household income went to the top one percent, and in 1997 it jumped to 13.6%. Another fact from the article is a study conducted by Lars Osberg from Dalhousie University. It found that the poor in America worked more hours than their poor counterparts in Canada, Britain, Sweden, France, and Germany. The third fact that I think is relatively important is that since 1979, the tuition at America's public colleges has risen faster than most parents' income.
The argument that I would make concerning utilitarianism that presented in this film is if wages for the rich keep rising it should also be applied the working class as well otherwise it is double standard which implies that the working class should not be allowed to get better wages and get a hard in life in rather than staying at the bottom.
Two exceptions to the class avoidance phenomenon: discussion about the middle class as acceptable and presenting glimpses of the poor and wealthy that conform to common stereotypes. Americans are misinformed to believe the following myths: class distinctions are non-existent, middle-class is the norm, everyone is getting richer, and the chances of success are equal for everyone. The U.S. has the highest income gap between the wealthiest and poorest in the industrial world, which is approximately 12 to 1. In 2004, the affluent experienced a wage increase by 12%, whereas the 99% of average income makers saw an increase of 1%. The Making of the Ghetto: One of the biggest forms of equity is home ownership, and between 1933 and 1978, the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) supported millions of Americans by providing small down payments and reasonable payment plans, if they fell within their requirements.
With the rise of big business and industrialization came several problems associated with the economic boom. The rich were getting richer. The poor were getting poorer. The gap between the "haves" and the "have nots
The Millionaire Next Door written by William Danko and Thomas J. Stanley illustrates the misconception of high luxury spenders in wealthy neighborhoods are considered wealthy. This clarifies that American’s who drive expensive cars, and live in lavish homes are not millionaires and financially independent. The authors show the typical millionaire are one that is frugal, and disciplined. Their cars are used, and their suits were purchased at a discount. As we read the book from cover to cover are misconceptions start to fade. The typical millionaire is very frugal in all endeavors and finds the best discounts possible. A budget is implemented daily, monthly, and annually for a typical millionaire. They live by the budget and are goal oriented. Living well below their means is crucial for a millionaire, and discovering ways to allocate time and money more efficiently. The typical millionaire next door is different than the majority of America presumes. Let’s first off mention what it is not. The typical millionaire is surprisingly not the individual with the lavish house worth a million dollars, owning multiple expensive cars, a boat, expensive clothes, and ultimately living lavishly. The individual is frugal and often looks for discounts for consumable goods. The book illustrates the typical millionaire in one simple word: frugal. It is shocking to believe that this is true, but it does make sense. To achieve financial independence is inherently more satisfying and important than accumulating wealth. According to the book the majority of these millionaires portray characteristics of being sacrificial, disciplined, persistent and frugal. In the book it states, “Being frugal is the cornerstone of wealth-building. Yet far too often th...
Eliminate the notion of emotion and you have the essence of the film Equilibrium. The setting is in the future where all emotion and artistic tendencies are outlawed and those who commit ‘sense offenses’ are whisked away to be incinerated. In order for feelings to be suppressed everyone must take their daily injections. There is a group of people that enforce these laws known as Clerics. John Preston is the leader of that group. He starts out being very diligent about his duties. He even killed his own partner for reading a book of poetry. John is the epitome of an authoritarian type leader. He is well trained in martial arts and proves that he is not someone to be messed with.
Between the end of World War II and the late 1970s, income inequality in the U.S. was reduced; but since 1970s, the situation with wealth distribution has changed. Data from tax returns in 1976 show that the top 1 percent of households received 8.9 percent of all pre-tax income. In 2008, the top 1 percent’s share had more than doubled to 21.0 percent.
Economics of Reich “Why the Rich are getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer” written by Robert Reich, describes as the title says, why the rich are getting richer and the poor, poorer. In Reich’s essay, he delves into numerous reasons and gives examples of each. It makes one wonder if the world will continue on the path of complete economic separation between the rich and the poor. One very important factor Reich examines in his essay is that large corporations are always trying to find the edge, whether that is new technology or cheaper wages. One may ask, how does that affect me?
Over the past few years, a number of occurrences have displayed the growing economic and political inequality of the United States. The currently dissipated Occupy Movement did draw the general public’s attention to the ridiculous strides made by the rich, whose incomes have skyrocketed within the past four decades. Those pertaining to the middle-income and poor have sadly had their incomes stagnate. According to Caroline Fairchild from the Huffington Post the middle class incomes steadily is on the decline. In 1968 the middle class earned about 53.2 percent of national income in 1968. This number has now fallen to 45.7 percent. Super PACs became a concern as more individual donors willingly wrote up enormous checks to support their particular candidates. As a result, this gave prominence to the growing political inequality, as well as highlighting the rich’s ability to have their words have much more weight over the average citizen in America.