INCOME INEQUALITY IN AMERICA 1 America in today's society is burdened with many economic and political problems that have begun to plague the nation. Controversial topics are constantly being debated from sunrise to sunset across the country with supporters and those who oppose each bearing various levels of financial and political misfortune. With the numerous economic and political problems that affect the nation, the argument over the issue of income inequality is one of the most notable. Creating a political civil war, proponents from both sides have brought the issue into national view and debate has grown substantially within recent years. …show more content…
Income inequality is not an issue in the United States. The reason for for income inequality resides in a culmination of problems that lead to the development of income inequality. Each side of the income inequality debate has their own evidence and well crafted arguments respectively. For many, the growing gap between the wealthy and less fortunate populations in the United States is not directly correlated to solely income inequality itself. Proponents for this stance see income inequality not as the problem itself, but a problem that is being generated from already present issues residing in society. Garret (2010) exposes an example of what he believes results in a common misconception among the American people. After each Census, the United States Census releases income statistics dervived from the collection of Census ballots that are released for public viewing. However, these numbers generated only peer into what Garret (2010) alludes to as an array of skewed results that do not take into account various unrepresented factors. Garret (2010) reveals a major flaw surrounding the Census numbers in his article where he says, “the implication of changing individual incomes is that individual households do not remain in the same income quintiles over time. Thus, comparing different income quintiles over time is like comparing apples to oranges, because it means comparing incomes of different people at different stages in their earnings profile.” Garret (2010) proceeds to point out that regardless of the nation's economic position, at some level there will always be an amount of income inequality present and believes that this inequality results from a functionally INCOME INEQUALITY IN AMERICA 2 stable capitalist style economy.
Further arguments bolster the defense of this perception regarding income inequality. Writers, such as The New York Times Tyler Cowen, add wood to the fire in his articles written about this topic. As a proponent of this view, Cowen (2015) argues that income inequality should not be the main concern and rather than to try and bridge the gap between the wealthy and lower classes, the country should turn its' attention to the problem of economic mobility as the real issue. The argument made by Cowen slightly parallels the argument made by Garret in that income inequality will never cease to exist, but we as a nation can reduce it by defeating what Cowen (2015) believes the underlying cause to be; economic mobility. Instead of taking a communist approach to the situation with taking money from the wealthy class and distributing it to the less fortunate, Cowen (2015) proposes that by uprooting the financial instability of the lower class the government can thrust them into higher economic status. CNBC writer Carol Roth also provided another argument. Roth (2014) is very blunt and to the point in her article regarding the problem, or there lack of, income inequality in the United States starting by stating the harsh reality that life is not equal for many Americans in a variety of circumstances. Counteracting the argument of citizens that believe there is income inequality and that there needs to be a redistribution of wealth, Roth (2014) says, …show more content…
“Are we obligated to then make everyone in the world equal, since it was a matter of luck that some of us ended up in America instead of Sierra Leone where the GDP per capita is around $374, or The Congo, where GDP per capita is around $271 and more than 70 percent of the population lives in poverty?” This statement came after Roth (2014) made a statement regarding the “luck of the draw” that we as Americans received by being born in the United States. As people, we know that the idea regarding the redistribution of wealth to create financial equality among everyone is quite impossible as it reflects communism. This system has failed many times and can be seen in countries such as 20th century Russia and China. Roth's (2014) argument conveys her belief that in order to pull the poverty stricken out of their economic misfortune the political focus should be aimed at providing sufficient education INCOME INEQUALITY IN AMERICA 3 and training for citizens who are in this situation to help develop the professional skill sets that they do not already possess.
Roth (2014) believes that this solution will promote innovation, thus increasing the strength of the economy by creating more wealth that will benefit a major amount of people. This ideology is bolstered by the arguments made by Stephen Horwitz, a professor of economics at St. Lawrence University in New York. Horwitz (2013) believes that income inequality is not a major issue and that equality is actually increasing due to wealthy providing goods and services to the less fortunate which results in a mutual beneficial relationship where both the wealthy and the poorer classes are doing better off. These arguments represent the ideologies of many citizens who believe that income inequality is not an
issue. As with every debatable topic, there is always going to be another side trying to argue the opposite ideology. In this case, there are also citizens who believe that income inequality is the problem and has not arisen out of the ashes of other economic and political issues. One argument hitting the nation is that income inequality does not just have a negative effect on the poor class but undermines economic growth and effects everyone. American Prospect writer David Callahan explains this ideology saying that, “unequal growth concentrates wealth in the hands of a tiny slice of consumers who can only spend so much money. In turn, the vast majority of earners are left with little extra cash for goods and services. Resulting weak demand undermines growth.” Callahan (2013) conveys the idea that the result of this weaker demand generates negative economic outcomes resulting the loss of economic status across all percentages of the nation. The Center for American Progress also released a statement, which Callahan (2013) incorporates into his article saying, “new research suggests that growing inequality in the United States may have broad social and economic effects — by reducing stable demand for goods and services, dampening entrepreneurialism, undermining the inclusiveness and responsiveness of political and economic institutions, limiting access to education, and stunting individual development.” Martin
In Confronting Inequality, Paul Krugman discusses the cost of inequality and possible solutions. Krugman argues to say that it is a fantasy to believe the rich live just like the middle class. Then, he goes into detail about how middle class families struggle to try to give their children a better life and how education plays a factor in children’s future lives. For example, children’s ability to move into higher education could be affected by their parents economic status. Also, He discusses how politicians play a role in the inequality, because most of politicians are in the upper economic class. Finally, Krugman says how we could possibly have solutions to these various inequalities, but how America won’t get
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.
Inside of this video, this guy really targets an issue nobody has really been presented. He shows charts that talk about how we Americans think our wealth is distributed. We think distribution is doing alright. Americans think that the bottom 40% is getting a bit of money. They also believe that the middle class is doing reasonably well. Unfortunately, that is not the case. In the video, he breaks it down a little bit getter. He shows a graph that shows how money is actually being distributed. The poorest of poor don 't even register on the poverty line. The middle class is barely making it. And then there is this huge difference between "the rich" and the poor. It is proven that the 1% of America has 40% of the entire nation 's wealth ("Wealth Inequality in America."). The bottom 80% of America only share 7% of the nation 's wealth among themselves. The top 1% has 50% of the stocks, bonds, and mutual funds. The bottom 50% of Americans only own 0.5% ("Wealth Inequality in America."). The poor is not just getting by but they are scraping and fighting to get by. Now that it is clear that there is a lot of poor people in America, it is important to figure out how to fix
Wealth inequality and income inequality are often mistaken as the same thing. Income inequality is the difference of yearly salary throughout the population.1 Wealth inequality is the difference of all assets within a population.2 The United States has a high degree of wealth distribution between rich and poor than any other majorly developed nation.3
The film “Inequality for all” directed by Jacob Kornbluth, begins with Robert Reich asking students three questions to consider in a lecture when talking about the uneven distribution of wealth. First, what is happening regarding the distribution of wealth? He then inquires to why this is happening. Last of all, he asks the students if the distribution of wealth is a problem in America. He addresses these questions as well as many others in his lecture on the growing divide between America’s rich and poor. Robert Reich is an economist, author, and educator as well as public policy professor who served in the Ford, Carter and Clinton administration. He has dealt with this particular topic for over three decades and continues to spread his political views as a professor at the University of Berkley. Furthermore, he talks about the widening gap between the wealthy and the poor/middle class. He goes beyond the obvious facts to show us why this is happening and uses statistical data to display this growing problem. He gives concerning evidence that wages are declining, and that America’s weakening economy is based on consumerism.
Income inequality not only harms us fiscally, but also affects our mental and physical wellbeing; therefore, it is important to identify the right ways to control wealth distribution among people.
The main message of “Inequality for all” is trying to find out what is happening in regard to the distribution of income and wealth in the United States.
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...
In these articles “Inequality Has Been Going on Forever… but That Doesn’t Mean It’s Inevitable” and “Confronting Inequality” writers David Leonhardt and Paul Krugman both agree that higher education and higher taxation on the wealthy will put an end to inequality. Leonhardt argues that Americans have been dealing with income inequality for a long time but have not been dealt yet making the middle-class question why taxation and educational systems benefit the wealthy. Krugman argues that Americans should confront and find solutions to end inequality. Krugman argument is more effective than Leonhardt, because his argument is concise, many data and information are given, lists the middle-class problems and gives possible solutions to end inequality.
The United States of America is consider to be one of the most wealthiest countries in the world today, if not, the most wealthiest country in the world. Yet, it has the most uneven distribution of wealth of any country today. As wealthy as the country is it, it can’t even provide/doesn’t truly give the basic needs for its citizens like healthcare, housing and education. For the longest time, there’s been a wide gap between the poor/middle class and the wealthy that’s may consider to be ‘unjustified’ and the gap keeps on growing at a rapid rate. This gap is referred as income inequality. Income inequality is defined as “the extent to which income is distributed in an uneven manner among a population. In the United States, income inequality,
Income inequality continues to increase in today’s world, especially in the United States. Income inequality means the unequal distribution between individuals’ assets, wealth, or income. In the Twilight of the Elites, Christopher Hayes, a liberal journalist, states the inequality gap between the rich and the poor are increasing widening, and there need to have things done - tax the rich, provide better education - in order to shortening the inequality gap. America is a meritocratic country, which means that everybody has equal opportunity to be successful regardless of their class privileges or wealth. However, equality of opportunity does not equal equality of outcomes. People are having more opportunities to find a better job, but their incomes are a lot less compared to the top ten percent rich people. In this way, the poor people will never climb up the ladder to high status and become millionaires. Therefore, the government needs to increase all the tax rates on rich people in order to reduce income inequality.
The United States of America has proven to be a juggernaut in the world economy. It triumphs over any other country almost doubling the GDP of the runner up (i.e., China’s economy). It is also is one of the youngest among developed countries, due to a lineage of fortunate events it has become a powerhouse. Many people from an outside the U.S. may still believe that anyone can come and earn enough money to thrive. Unfortunately, that is not the reality for everyone, although there is potential here; it is also one of the most unequal countries. In my paper I seek to understand and unveil what socioeconomic affect does income disparity play in our society.
This can be seen in the research conducted by the International Monetary Fund or the IMF. This research was done by Joseph Stiglitz, a Keynesian economist and Nobel Prize recipient. The research was published by Jonathan Ostry, the deputy head of the IMF's research department, and the economists Andrew Berg and Charalambos Tsangarides. The findings dismisses right wing argument that redistributing incomes is self-defeating.The IMF dismay rightwing politicians who argue that overcoming inequality robs the rich of incentives to invest and the poor of incentives to work and is counter-productive. There are several rebuttals used for arguing against the existence of income inequality. Another argument is that globalization is making it happen everywhere but John Oliver, who is previously quoted states “it is a divide that it is happening everywhere due to Globalization, which is true but as far as that is happening it is happening at a faster rate here than over in other places.” Also the idea of the wealth gap and it’s move to perfection but also according to Oliver “ No one is arguing for perfection, we are not going to live in a world where we think all Baldwin’s are talented.” There is Doug and than everyone else. Thus showing the research is failing to show any support for those who support the “non-existent” wealth gap. In the end Income inequality has been proven to be detrimental at
national election. On one level, income inequality is a non-issue in a market economy where there will always be winners and losers. In a market where individuals are free to make choices and reap the rewards of the choices they make, it is a given that some will wind up with more than others. We cannot all be equal because we don’t all have the same natural endowments. Those with certain skills and abilities will often wind up with more than those without. And those who went to school to train for specific occupations that pay well will earn more than those who did not. In short, skilled workers will earn more than non-skilled workers. Consequently, in an increasingly global economy where there will be two classes — skilled and educated workers at the top earning high wages and unskilled and poorly educated workers at the bottom earning low wages — there is bound to be inequality. Moreover, as these trends continue, the gap between the top and the bottom is only bound to grow. On another level, however, income inequality is a seminal issue because of what it really speaks to: the disappearance of the middle class. Inequality per se may not be the problem; rather it is the rate of increase in
TThere is an extremely high degree of social inequality in America compared to other modern industrialized countries and this inequality comes from the inequitable distribution of income and wealth in relation to occupational choice or necessity, racial/ethnic inequality, and gender inequality. “Any socially defined group may be subject to discrimination and exclusion” according to Douglas Massey and this is very evident in our country’s society. The rules of social stratification allocation that distributes income and wealth across various roles of occupations in the division of labor (e.g., homemaker, care giver, factory worker, doctor, or politician) limits the social mobility mechanisms that link individuals to these roles or occupations