Capital Analysis : Capital And Income Inequality Essay

Murray, Harry. "Deniable Degradation: The Finger-Imaging Of Welfare Recipients." Sociological Forum 15.1 (2000): 39. Academic Search Premier. Web. 28 May 2013.

The continuous disparity of wealth and income can cause constant economic problems within a society. Although it is not apparent all the time, there are few benefits of discrepancy itself such as individual wealth, capital, and labor. Both Smith and Carnegie have distinct beliefs about wealth that differentiate from one another, yet are similar in certain ways. Adam Smith confined all his ideas about the common man in his “Wealth of Nations”. Whereas, in the “Gospel of Wealth,” Andrew Carnegie had distinct beliefs about the effects of capitalism . All in all, economic conditions of the 21st century still date back to previous years and signify the importance of economic competition.

In the United States, high standard of living is not equally shared with in the Americans. The 1970s and 1990s was period where economic inequality began to grow. Emmanuel Saez, an economics professor at UC Berkeley has been doing a research for the U.S. income inequality. He states that there has been an increase since the 1970s, and has reached levels that have not been seen since 1928. “In 1928, the top 1% of families received 23.9% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90% received 50.7%. But the Depression and World War II dramatically reshaped the nation’s income distribution, by 1944 the top 1%’s share was down to 11.3%, while the bottom 90% were receiving 67.5%, levels that would remain more or less constant for the next three decades. But starting in the mid- to late 1970s, the uppermost percent income share began rising dramatically, while that of the bottom 90% started to fall.”(DeSilver) Ever since then, economic inequality continues to increase, especially in the last three decades.

William Domhoff’s claims in the article Wealth, Income, and Power, are, for the most part, very strong. He makes strong statements regarding the concentration of wealth in the United States, and backs them up with good sources throughout. The statistics used are valid, and consistent among many trusted sources. The only area where Domhoff’s argument falls short is when he references the causes of wealth inequality. In this portion, his argument is a bit weak and could be strengthened by considering other important factors effecting wealth concentration, rather than limiting it to two seemingly all-important issues. Overall, upon examination of Domhoff’s ideas and sources, he presents an accurate and fairly strong argument about the unequal distribution of wealth in the United States.

Along with globalization market forces has had the greatest impact on income equalities in the United Sates. Thomas Piketty says that “by definition, in all societies, income inequality is the result of adding up these two components: inequality of income from labor and inequality of income from capital. The more unequally distributed each of these two components is, the greater the total inequality ... [a] decisive factor is the relation between these two dimensions of inequality: to what extent do individuals with high income from labor also enjoy high income from capital? Technically speaking, this relation is a statistical correlation, and the greater the correlation, the greater the total inequality, all other things being equal” (Piketty & Goldhammer, 2014, p. 242). In the U.S. the correlation between the two dimensions has become so astonishing that “President Obama called economic inequality “the defining challenge of our time.” But while Americans acknowledge that the gap between the rich and poor has widened over the last decade, very few see it as a serious issue. Just five percent of Americans think that inequality is a major problem in need of attention” (Fitz,

In today’s capitalist economy, where economic transactions and business in general is centered on self-interest, there is a natural tendency for some people to make more than others. That is the basis for the “American Dream,” where people, if they worked hard, could make money proportional to their effort. However, what happens when this natural occurrence grows disproportional in its allocation of wealth within a society? The resulting issue becomes income inequality. Where a small portion of the population, own the majority of the wealth and the majority of the population own only a fraction of what the rich own. This prominent issue has always been the subject of social tension

Wealth inequality in the United States has grown tremendously since 1970. The United States continuously reveals higher rates of inequality as a result of perpetual support for free market capitalism. The high rates of wealth inequality cause the growing financial crisis to persist, lower socio-economic mobility, increase national poverty, and have adverse effects on health and well being.

Furthermore, when analyzing the different classes, and the distributions of wealth and income in the United Sates; for instance, the upper, middle, and lower classes – it is an astronomical amount of wealth that the top 1 percent acquire. It is also noted by Johnson & Rhodes (2015), “that income and wage inequality have risen sharply over the last thirty years” (pg. 228). Equally important to this, is how the average change in income is divided in Americas quintiles and the widening gaps. For example, in Table 5.2, while the lowest fifth quintile increased from $11,128 to $11,361 – a difference of $233.00 from years 2006 to 2012; the highest quintile increased from $289,446 to $319,918 – an exponential increase of $30,472 (pg. 229). With income inequalities at this rate, it is difficult for the majority of the United States to experience upward social mobility. Pursuing this further, in a line stated by Johnson and Rhodes (2015), “The wealthiest Americans can live on the dividends from their investments without having to touch the principle or work for a salary” (pg. 230). From this, it is visible to see how society has compartmentalized different levels of functions to keep a so called balance for the greater

In “Economic Elites, Investments, and Income Inequality” from the academic journal, Social Forces, graduate Ph. D student from Ohio State University, Michael Nau presents throughout his study the rise of an additional factor that has evidently influenced the concentration of vast amounts of income among the elite class, income from investments. In this era, the common belief is that demographics, labor market institutions, and technology are causing the inequality to rise and for the elites to produce astounding amounts of income. Nau’s findings present how the debate over the incomes of the elites has to be expanded apart from the ‘working rich class’ to also include the income producing wealth. In addition, Nau presents how the

Income Inequality in the United States has been a problem for decades. Since the year 1913 the gap in income inequality between the rich and poor in the U.S. has widened and has been a hot topic for debate. The rich keep getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. Thomas Pogge a German philosopher and a professor at Yale University argue that we live in a world where income and wealth are very unevenly distributed throughout society, thus leading to widespread poverty. Amartya Sen an Indian economist and philosopher of Bengali ethnicity argues that really freedoms should be both the ends and means of human development. Robert Reich a professor at Berkeley University and former secretary of labor under Bill Clinton, makes an fluent and impassioned

The highest earning fifth of U.S. families earned 59.1% of all income, while the richest earned 88.9% of all wealth. A big gap between the rich and poor is often associated with low social mobility, which contradicts the American ideal of equal opportunity. Levels of income inequality are higher than they have been in almost a century, the top one percent has a share of the national income of over 20 percent (Wilhelm). There are a variety of factors that influence income inequality, a few of which will be discussed in this paper. Rising income inequality is caused by differences in life expectancy, rapidly increases in the incomes of the top 5 percent, social trends, and shifts in the global economy.

Capitalism has been the central force behind the growth of the United States’ progressive economy. Within such advanced economic system the chances of economic disparity are significantly high. In fact, over the past three decades there has being a steady increase in unequal wealth distribution among the economic classes. To sustain the current unequal wealth distribution among the classes of the American population, there are numerous factors that influence and shape this trend. For some members of the population it is alarmingly disturbing to know that recent statistics have shown that, “In the US [alone] the wealthiest 1% of its population owns more than the bottom 95 %” (Gutman). As for the difference in economic wealth, it resulted

Saez presents his credible data through the use of ethos. Saez is a well-known economics professor who devotes time to publish reports about the income inequality in America. Although his reports are strictly opinion, he uses enough historical statistics and actual facts to make his writing credible. Many historical theories lay a foundation that helps prove income inequality is necessary. Social Darwinism is a collection of theories that explain why the rich get richer, while the poor become poorer. Social Darwinists generally claim that the strong and successful people should see their wealth and power increase while the weak and unmotivated should see their wealth and power decrease. This is an excellent explanation for the cause of income inequality and why it shouldn’t be stopped. Wealth can sometimes be a direct result of the hard work and dedication of a person that is motivated to become successful in life. While most people may work as hard as they can and only make an average income, there are the few exceptional cases where people can prosper and rise to great economic stability. For all other citizens, the reality is they may be motivated and driven to become successful just like everyone else, but can only manage a low or middle class job. This reality

A major social problem in America today is its inequality of the distribution of income. "Income inequality refers to the gap between the rich and the poor. The United States has the most unequal income distribution in the industrialized world, and it is growing at a faster rate than any other industrialized country" (Eitzen & Leedham, pg. 37). The main reason as to why income is distributed so unequally is because of the gap between social classes.

There are many inequalities prevalent in the US, and as a capitalist society, one of the most common is economic inequality. The Equality Trust defines economic inequality, as the gap between the well off and less well of in regards to overall economic distribution (“How Is”). See, our capitalist society strongly benefits those with a capitalist mentality and can afford the means to invest/own capital. Over the years there has been an increasing wealth gap between the top one percent earners and the general population. So why are the rich flourishing while the poor are struggling in this capitalist environment? The policy decisions of our country allow this inequality to permeate throughout our industries, thus creating a culture of power and greed. One result of this culture is the explosion of high salaries in the US and Emmanuel Saez explains this trend in Striking it Richer. Saez affirms, “Indeed, estimates based purely on wages and salaries show that the share of total wage and salaries earned by the top 1 percent wage income earners has jumped from 5.1 percent in 1970 to 12.0 percent in 2006” (Grusky 89). Too bad that the 99 percent of America missed out on this massive economic growth spurt. When economic growth is not evenly distributed among the general population, people tend to question our entire system. This has been an increasingly controversial issue, where corporate America is responsible for the constant exploitation of low-level employees. Through my