Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Economics and inequality essay
Social class and society
Economics and inequality essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Economics and inequality essay
#4. Is Increasing Economic Inequality a Serious Problem? Yes, it is a serious problem according to Stiglitz, who believes that inequality affects the economy, and the democratic system. On the other hand, Rector and Sheffield argue that poor people are richer than people think (page 93). Furthermore, poor people have the same items that were meant for the middle-class, and most of the poor is never hungry. There is a huge gap between the rich and the poor in the United States. This alone proves that the inequality in the world is simply unjustified. According to Malahy, Rubinlicht, and Kaiser (2009), “the Belief in a Just World (BJW) is the notion that people get what they deserve and deserve what they get.” For instance, if a person dropped …show more content…
out of school and became a crack-head it’s their own fault. BJW represents laziness, poor, illiterate, and sorry. However, the rich are perceived as smart, good worker, gifted, and do whatever it takes to make money. Most Americans realize that economic unfairness in the U.S. is greater than other wealthy developed countries, and the government refuses to do anything that will minimize the gap. The United States are in comparison with other nations, and people are asking questions about the huge difference in the United States. Scholars are wondering why every country but the United States has reduced socioeconomic unfairness and made it their major goal (Osberg & Smeeding, 2006). I agree with Stiglitz theory, because the economy is unstable the poor is getting poorer and the rich is getting richer.
Rector and Sheffield must have been wealthy all their lives, because they have no idea what they are talking about. From my perspective, I disagree, with the fact that items where designated for the middle-class to purchase and not the poor. Who in the world allowed them to even put this crap in a book? What makes them think that the middle-class is so much better the poor? Poor people are allowed to have nice things too! Just because you are poor don’t mean you are homeless and hungry all the time. A person’s income is what classifies an individual as poor in the United States. If your income is below poverty level, you are indeed poor, depending on how many dependents you may have. Furthermore, people do not have an option to be poor. Many of us were born into poverty and that’s all we know. In fact, being lazy has nothing to do with it. The rich white people are the reason why people are poor. I assumed the authors forgot about slavery and unskilled labor that made them rich; as of today, they are living a prosperous life because of Native Americans, Blacks, and Latinos hard work for at least 400
years.
For example, Dally is one of the poor greasers from the east side of the city, and Bob is a very rich Soc from the west side of the city. Dally, being a greaser from the east side of the city, has very little material wealth. Ponyboy states about all the greasers, “We’re poorer than the Socs and the middle class” (3). What little money Dally has he earns riding in local rodeos. He does not even own a car, but borrows Buck Merill’s when he needs one. In fact, Dally does not even have a permanent home. Ponyboy states that Dally “lived anywhere he could” (105). Therefore, Dally is an underprivileged greaser with little money and few possessions. On the contrary, Bob Sheldon is one of the extremely rich Socs from the west side of the city. Bob has no reason to work because everything he wants is handed to him by his affluent parents. Ponyboy describes the Socs, Bob’s click, as “the jet set, the West-side rich kids” (2). The Socs all seem to drive around in expensive sports cars and wear costly madras clothing, and Bob is no exception. Randy states that Bob’s parents “‘spoiled him rotten’” (116). Unlike Dally, Bob has everything he wants. Money and material things are not a concern. Clearly, financial circumstances set these two
In the documents titled, William Graham Sumner on Social Darwinism and Andrew Carnegie Explains the Gospel of Wealth, Sumner and Carnegie both analyze their perspective on the idea on “social darwinism.” To begin with, both documents argue differently about wealth, poverty and their consequences. Sumner is a supporter of social darwinism. In the aspects of wealth and poverty he believes that the wealthy are those with more capital and rewards from nature, while the poor are “those who have inherited disease and depraved appetites, or have been brought up in vice and ignorance, or have themselves yielded to vice, extravagance, idleness, and imprudence” (Sumner, 36). The consequences of Sumner’s views on wealth and poverty is that they both contribute to the idea of inequality and how it is not likely for the poor to be of equal status with the wealthy. Furthermore, Carnegie views wealth and poverty as a reciprocative relation. He does not necessarily state that the wealthy and poor are equal, but he believes that the wealthy are the ones who “should use their wisdom, experiences, and wealth as stewards for the poor” (textbook, 489). Ultimately, the consequences of
In "Class in America", Gregory Mantsios says that "when politicians and social commentators draw attention to the plight of the poor, they do so in a manner that obscures the class structure and denies any sense of exploitation." Based off our readings, class discussion and films, income inequality is known to be erased or ignore. Our society frowns upon the expression of income in our daily conversations, as it could be seen braggy or a complaint depending on your status of income. Because it's frowned upon to talk about, the topic of income inequality becomes erased or ignored. In addition, income inequality in America's class structure can affect people's ability to reach their American Dream.
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. .
The author juxtaposes the rich and poor with those in between in order to convince the audience, the middle class, that they should follow in the footsteps of both those richer and poorer than them in order to cease their materialistic attitudes. Near the end of the essay, Eighner states, “I think this is an attitude I share with the very wealthy—we both know there is plenty more where what we have came from. Between us are the rat-race millions who have confounded their selves with the objects they grasp and who nightly scavenge the cable channels looking for they know not what.” The author is stating that the wealthy and the homeless are both aware that there are things more important in life than tangible objects. Everyone else, however, has not made this connection yet and still searches, meaninglessly, for something of value. The middle class is often known to aspire to...
Furthermore it creates a rhetoric that states it is the responsibility of the middle class to change the circumstances of those in need. This makes those in the middle class have a pressure they did not choose, and also those in poverty an expectation that they might not otherwise have had. Other than when Beegle states, “If the teacher had been exposed to Poverty 101, she would have the skills needed to find out what motivators made sense to me (342),” she makes no other suggestions on just how exactly the middle class would end the cycles of
The media portrays the upper class as something to strive for. Obtaining wealth and material possessions will bring you a happy life. The only way to get ahead is to emulate the rich and powerful and to live vicariously through them (Kendall 316). The media’s emphasis on the upper class takes away from people living life for themselves. Instead, they are persuaded to obtain a lifestyle that is realistically out of their means. Kendall states, “Largely through marketing and advertising, television promoted the myth of the classless society, offering on one hand the images of the American dream fulfilled wherein any and everyone can become rich and on the other suggesting that the lived experience of this lack of class hierarchy was expressed by our equal right to purchase anything we could afford”. Exaggerated views of the rich and successful in America are largely portrayed via television. Which gives a false idea of what happiness, wealth and material possessions can bring (Kendall 317). The poor and homeless are at the bottom of the class structure and are often overlooked, ignored and only portrayed as deserving of sympathy. They are stereotyped to be people who have problems such as drugs or alcohol (Kendall 318). Kendall goes on to explain that the middle class is considered the “working class” and are
In addition, the poor are overburdened they always have been, especially in 2014. This is owing to the fact that the middle class is close to disappearing, which is forming a large gap between the poor and the rich. Furthermore, banking can be more expensive for nearly all poor people, who are usually put in extreme circumstances where they are required to pay more taxes. And the poor are usually shut out from society and left on the street as if they were a piece of garbage, which is why it is particularly difficult to attain a job as a poor person. Not many people in the world care about the poor.
There are many people that think there is economic and wealth equality in the United States , but with all the statistics I provided it can be clearly seen that inequality in America is a serious issue , and it's getting worse with every year. I do believe that there should be some income inequality because that drives people to succeed , but I also believe that too much inequality limits a lot of people from achieving financial success.
There has always been a wealth gap between the richest and poorest in society. However, in the past decade, the wealth gap between the richest and poorest citizens in the US has been growing rapidly. In the 70s and 80s, the wealth and income growth rate for both poor and rich people were similar, however, between the years 2009 and 2012 the top 1% income increased 31% while for the bottom 20%, their income actually dropped and for the vast majority of Americans, the average yearly income only increased by 0.4% [4]. The question is, is wealth gap bad? Is a growing or extreme wealth gap unhealthy for the economy and social stability or is it a necessary part of it.
Divisions within the social stratum is a characteristic of societies in various cultures and has been present throughout history. During the middle ages, the medieval feudal system prevailed, characterized by kings and queens reigning over the peasantry. Similarly, in today’s society, corporate feudalism, otherwise known as Capitalism, consists of wealthy elites dominating over the working poor. Class divisions became most evident during America’s Gilded Age and Progressive era, a period in time in which the rich became richer via exploitation of the fruits of labor that the poor persistently toiled to earn. As a result, many Americans grew compelled to ask the question on everyone’s mind: what do the rich owe the poor? According to wealthy
“There is a wide belief that Americans are less class conscious than Europeans” (Vanneman). Because the United States consumes more than any other country, the global economy relies on our consumption. “The middle class is an ambiguous social classification, broadly reflecting the ability to lead a comfortable life” (Kharas). During the industrial revolution, there were aristocrat traditions in royalty, class, and rank in Europe. In America, the industrial revolution was coming of a wealthy nation. The United States is has a two party system, Republicans and Democrats. The Democrats wanted more people in the middle class, mainly blacks and immigrants. The Republicans wanted to protect the people who were already in the middle class, whites, and successful working people. The middle class in America is sometimes threatened by its own success. “The definition of the middle class is the people of generic roots like Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, Robert Johnson, and Sam Walton can become billionaires” (Hockenberry). Not everyone who is in the middle class can become a billionaire and using their stories as an example is the death of the American
...ment, income inequality will exist due to the rise of some economically successful people and the further development of factors that push people into poverty. Although it may not seem fair that there are rich people blowing money on impractical and meaningless things while people live in poverty, it’s a reality that the United States has experienced for centuries.
In “Working Class Whites” Angeline F. Price quotes Fussel saying, “[o]ne class gets the sugar and the other gets the shit” (Fussel, 25). Later Price responds, “in American society the ‘other’ is invariably poverty stricken and powerless” (Price 648). That is to say that the comfort of the rich is at cost of the discomfort of the poor. Correspondingly, wealth or the lack of, have been associated with a complex of superiority versus inferiority. Therefore, one is treated according to the amount of wealth one has accumulated. Such ideology was created by the rich through the widespread rhetoric of separation based on socioeconomic factors. This separation has benefited the upper class, and hurt the lower class especially when it pertains to the
Income inequality is a big problem in the United States because the top, wealthiest American saw huge increases in their incomes, which the rest had their incomes go down. Bottom people do not have the same amount of money and the opportunity to move up the social ladder as the rich people do. In order to reduce income inequality, the government needs to tax the rich people more, and give poor people more money and more social services - education, food subsidies, health care.