More handpicked essays just for you.
The role of income in inequality of distribution of wealth in america
Income inequality between classes
Wealth in america
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Taking Sides Summary-Analysis Form
Title and Author of Article: Christopher Jencks
Briefly state the main idea of this article: The main idea of this article is that economic inequality has steadily risen in the United States between the richest people and the poorest people. And this inequality affects the people in more ways than buying power; it also affects education, life expectancy, living conditions and possibly happiness. Another idea that he brought up was that the American government tends to give less help to the unemployed than other rich countries.
List 2-4 supporting points or arguments the author uses to bolster the main ideas: A good supporting point that Jencks used to show that the American government tends to give less help to poor than other countries, is a study done using the 90/10 ratio. In the study it showed that within the English-speaking world the United States was the most unequal of all. Another supporting point that helps his argument is when he talks about the United States doing little to limit wage inequality.
List three facts the author uses to support the main idea: Jencks included a lot of studies and charts into his article that helped his argument. 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 counterpart 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 parent's income. Thus giving the poor even less of a chance to receive a higher education.
What is a good counterargument to the thesis of this article?
I think a good counterargument would be that inequality these days is different, not very many people these days live with out completely no material nesacities. The ones that do are due to their own downfalls, whether they are mentally ill or have a drug problem or any other number of illness's. The United States provides less help to the poor, but it's not no help.
Ehrenreich’s use of statistical information also proves to her audience that she in fact has done her research on this topic. She admits that poverty is a social topic that she frequently talks about. She researched that in 1998 the National Coalition for the Homeless reported that nationwide on average it would take about a wage of $8.89 to afford a one bedroom apartment and that the odds of common welfare recipients landing a job that pays such a “living wage” were about 97 to 1. Ehrenreich experiences this statistic in first person when she set out job hunting in Key West, Florida when she applied to 20 different jobs, ranging from wait tables to housekeeping, and of those applications, zero were responded to.
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
people agree with the state that Liz borrows from Thomas Jefferson, "Everybody should have an education proportional to their life,"(Addison 256). Unfortunately, the average income between rich and poor in America is not accurate, everyone supposed to become somebody in life; college gives opportunity to everyone who wants to do so, to become whatever they want, and at any age with a low cost. as much as the income level between rich and poor in America stays unbalanced; college will always be there to gives opportunity to people who want to learn, but cannot afford to attend university. Liz Addison points out an example in the article.
In the article, “Confronting Inequality” by Paul Krugman compares income inequality from the 1960s to the inequality that America society face today. Most commonly is seen the wealth gap between the rich and the poor are difference between their incomes. He gives the reason why he and America should care about the rising inequality. One of his arguments is the economic need to progress for lower or middle class families and the need for seeking more equal of income. Krugman has many quotes from people have a big impact on America help argue his point about inequality. “High inequality, which has turned us into a nation with a much weakened middle class, has a corrosive effect on social relations and politics, one that has become ever more
With each class comes a certain level in financial standing, the lower class having the lowest income and the upper class having the highest income. According to Mantsios’ “Class in America” the wealthiest one percent of the American population hold thirty-four percent of the total national wealth and while this is going on nearly thirty-seven million Americans across the nation live in unrelenting poverty (Mantsios 284-6). There is a clear difference in the way that these two groups of people live, one is extreme poverty and the other extremely
...he nation’s prosperity as increases in benefits and wages to poor and working class Americans. Most of the gains due to the rise in the GDP in recent years wind up in the hands of the wealthiest of Americans. The increase in income inequality has cause stagnation in real wages among low skilled workers and has led to an increase in poverty. Unable to gain the education necessary to escape the cycle of low skilled jobs with little chance of upward mobility, children of parents who are in poverty stand a higher chance of being in poverty themselves. The solution to the problem of poverty is not simple; especially when it may involve changes in the way the U.S. labor market functions. However, as it stands now, failures of the labor market lead to higher rates of poverty, and unless the problem is addressed, we are unlikely to see a reduction in the U.S. poverty rate.
Data generated by the Census Bureau, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Federal Reserve and other nonpartisan sources oppose claims commonly made. For example, data from such agencies show that differences in family income largely reflect differences in how many members of a family actually work and how hard they work. Americans in all income groups have prospered, or have failed to prosper, together. Gains by upper-income Americans have not come at the expense of middle or lower-income Americans. Nor has anyone else gained in those periods when higher-income families have lost ground.
Inequality exist and is high in America because the amount of income and wealth that is distributed through power. In America the income distribution is very inequality and the value of a person wealth is based on their income with their debts subtracted. “As of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers)” (Domhoff, 2011). In contrary the poor do not get ahead and the rich get more. Americans are judged and placed in class categories through their home ownership which translates to wealth. Americans social class is often associated with their assets and wealth. “People seek to own property, to have high incomes, to have interesting and safe jobs, to enjoy the finest in travel and leisure, and to live long and healthy lives” (Domhoff, 2011). Power indicates how these “values” are not distributed equally in American society. Huge gains for the rich include cuts in capital gains and dividends and when tax rates decrease for the tiny percent of Americans income is redistributed. Taxes directly affect the wealth and income of Americans every year.
America’s upper class has been getting richer since the past three decades, and we have still not found a way to stop this. We have been unable to find a way to distribute America’s wealth equally, so we can have a decent lower class and a good middle class. Inequality has caused many people to struggle in various ways, but their is alway another side to the story.
Income inequality has affected American citizens ever since the American Dream came to existence. The American Dream is centered around the concept of working hard and earning enough money to support a family, own a home, send children to college, and invest for retirement. Economic gains in income are one of the only possible ways to achieve enough wealth to fulfill the dream. Unfortunately, many people cannot achieve this dream due to low income. Income inequality refers to the uneven distribution of income and wealth between the social classes of American citizens. The United States has often experienced a rise in inequality as the rich become richer and the poor become poorer, increasing the unstable gap between the two classes. The income gap in America has been increasing steadily since the late 1970’s, and has now reached historic highs not seen since the 1920’s (Desilver). UC Berkeley economics professor, Emmanuel Saez conducted extensive research on past and present income inequality statistics and published them in his report “Striking it Richer.” Saez claims that changes in technology, tax policies, labor unions, corporate benefits, and social norms have caused income inequality. He stands to advocate a change in American economic policies that will help close this inequality gap and considers institutional and tax reforms that should be developed to counter it. Although Saez’s provides legitimate causes of income inequality, I highly disagree with the thought of making changes to end income inequality. In any diverse economic environment, income inequality will exist due to the rise of some economically successful people and the further development of factors that push people into poverty. I believe income inequality e...
Inequality today is one of the most significant problems that America faces. According to Inequality.org in 2015 Household income of the top 0.1% of the population gained $6,747,439 while bottom 90% of the population got $34,074 (Inequality.org). The gap between incomes only continues to grow every year, which requires a change in social and economic policies of the country. However, it should be remembered that economic indicators can tell about working conditions, living conditions, nutrition, education of representatives of various groups of the population, but they can not show a picture of the realizability and opportunities to be successful in life for different groups of the population. That is why at the end
We look in particular to the case of the United States. The US is the world’s leading power and hegemon, who also has the world’s highest GDP and GDP per capita. However, in recent years the gap between the rich and the poor has been growing at a fast pace. This prevalence of income inequality in a free market society like the US indicates that inequality is a direct result of a market or government failure. In a free market it is believed that individuals possess an equal opportunity to be successfully, but because of misallocation of resources in a market economy this is not possible.
Economic equality is the distribution of income and wealth on the basis of inequality. The distribution of wealth is how assets such as income, land, stocks, and other investments from both the richest and poorest of society today. Income is only what is per year. To become successful and rich you have to build up the wealth but with that being said, it is hard to do it while having a low income each year with a huge family. Income all contains from the job you have you need to have a high paying job yearly if you want to build from that. Some individual’s wealth is passed down from families while others have to work for what they want and if they want to become successful. Building is the key to success in this case. Upper classes are the
The economy in the United States is undoubtedly unequally distributed and unstable. Social stratification, the society’s categorization of people in a hierarchy, is to blame for this. Americans subscribe to the perception that everyone should be placed in a certain group for their financial status; high class, meaning the wealthy individuals, or the lower class, the individuals suffering from poverty. Both social classes’ contribute negatively to the people involved. Wealthier communities experience emotional downfalls and isolation while the poverty stricken communities by decreasing their life chances for being successful and even their length of life. The social problems of wealth and poverty
When it comes to the topic of economic inequality, most of us will agree that inequality has started hundreds of years ago and is still ongoing. When I was a child, I used to think the reason someone may have been less wealthy is because they did not have a strong work ethic. Society has been categorized into various social classes which made me think that is was normal for people to have to struggle to make ends meet and live comfortably. The gap between the rich and poor has always existed and has gotten worse. According to Joseph Stiglitz, Inequality is the result of political and economic forces, while his theories are true, there are further reasons. Inequality came to exist because people relied on the idea of “The American Dream,” discrimination, and the inheritance of wealth and opportunity.