Rhetorical Analysis Of Confronting Inequality By Paul Krugman

Paul Krugman, in a recent article has eloquently discussed the issue of unequally distributed income in the United States (Krugman, 2015). He alludes to a number of general economic principles in this article. He talks about how a major misconception about the effect of taxes on income inequality in the United States has been addressed through a recent research carried out by Branko Milanovic and Janet Gornick.

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.

In Paul Krugman’s essay, “Confronting Inequality,” he discusses various points about how America has developed into quite the divided country over the years. The United States of America has become unequal in terms of annual income, living standards, education and school districts, politics, and social standards, just to name a few. Several matters of combatting the injustice faced by the nation are also mentioned. All of Krugman’s points revolve around one central question, being “why should we care about high and rising inequality?” (Graff, Birkenstein, Durst 561). I believe inequality truly does raise concerning problems within our society, but it also may be a positive thing for our people. Extreme equality could, in turn, result in a communistic government in which those who work into overdrive earn the same titles as those who do not.

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 “Confronting Inequality” by Paul Krugman he tries to show how inquailty in the united states has been getting worse and how it s affecting the united states. He provides many reason to why iniquility is the way it s and how he belives it can be helped. He also states the positive effects in helping the inquility in the united states will have.

(Black, 565-483) This means that every working family still pays taxes, however their taxes would be cut, meaning they would be paying less taxes than before. As for the “ millionaires” and higher class of society they will still pay the same taxes as they did before. This policy is more likely to be considered as equal because it is not rated fair when people from different social classes with a big difference in their incomes pay the same taxes. Especially because the taxes will eventually be lowered for the lower classes because they would be unable to afford paying the regular and high taxes. This will also lead in the cut of taxes for the high social class, which then makes the whole concept unequal. Not just for the people but also for the national economy (Witcover, 791-545).

There is no doubt that wealth inequality in America has been escalating quickly; the portion of total income earned by the top one percent has doubled since the beginning of the 1970’s. The wealthy are the main beneficiaries

In “Confronting Inequality”, author Paul Krugman explains how bad income inequality is for the American economy while suggesting what to do to fix this growing problem. Krugman covers topics such as the cost of inequality, how the middle class is over extending themselves, education and health care all while appealing to all three rhetorical elements. Krugman’s article has an overall effective and persuasive argument because of the topics he covers and his appeal to the reader with pathos, logos and ethos.

Throughout the article, Krugman attempts to grab the attention of his audience and help them become mindful of how the limited movement between social classes will have an effect on their life. In order to do so, he implements rhetorical questions that appeal to pathos and ethos, while displaying a negative tone and fearful mood. Rhetorical questions are used throughout the article to introduce an important idea and make the readers evaluate their current social status. For example, the author creates a hypothetical situation about the rich wanting to seek more advancements, he then questions, “What would you do?” (11) and follows this question with steps one could take to control the government and receive more leverage over the poor community. This question and response strengthened his argument because it appealed to the readers emotions about the ability the rich have to further harm the poor. Krugman also proposes questions that appeal to his ethos. After stating the steps one could take to “close off as many routes to upward mobility as possible,” (14) he asks, “It all sounds sort of familiar, doesn’t it?”(15). This question is meant to be unanswered but make the audience reflect. If the audience did feel that the

In his article "Confronting Inequality" Paul Krugman is asserting the fact of high socioeconomic inequality in the United States, while demonstrating its consequences and the variety of statistic evidences upon it. He is depicting modern American society where we have a huge gap between economic elite and lower-and middle-income classes. There is a time for ''a Great Moderation" reforms that will bring a socioeconomic equality.

“The American Dream: Dead Alive or on Hold?”, written by Brandon King and Paul Krugman’s “Confronting Inequality”, similar address the underlying issues of American ideals while trying to persuade the audience that the American dream, is in fact still alive. In order to convince his audience of liberal economists, King builds his argument by using own meaning the “American dream” while using a number of rhetorical devices that effectively convince the reader that the American Dream has not died. King begins his essay by offering his point of view on the American and the potential of building more prosperity in America. While King gave facts about the high rate of unemployment and the crumbling economy, he used such evidence to further help build his argument. The audience that King is reaching out to is the American public; more specifically the those who have been identified as people who should know that the American dream is still alive.

Jill Lepore shows strong evidence of Inequality in The United States by using Logos as a dominant resource in her essay. Readers can see that she is able to support her claims by using statistics to improve her knowledge of the intended argument of Income Inequality in the U.S. Jill Lepore uses strong evidence shown by the Gini Index(1). Which supports her stand on how Inequality in the U.S is raising and how U.S Citizens are unaware of the changes that have not yet been made that could inevitably improve the problem of Inequality in the U.S. Jill Lepore States that “Between 1947 and 1968, the U.S Gini Index dropped to .386, the lowest ever recorded. Then it began to climb”(1). Jill Lepore then tries to show the U.S Citizens that with all the statistics shown she is able to provide more effective proof that Inequality in America is on a rise. Furthermore, Jill Lepore uses examples of statistics in her essay “Richer and Poorer Accounting for Inequality” and demonstrate to Americans how efficient she is at using Logos. Using logos in this way strengthens her strategy to efficiently point out to U.S Citizens that the state's Inequality is becoming a bigger problem by the day.

The article is about how unfair income inequality is in today’s society. In the article, Timothy Noah also discusses that wealthy people are handed everything; whereas, the middle class have to work hard for what they have and where they stand. Timothy Noah also says that with income inequality follows poor economic growth, bad health for those who cannot afford it, and causing the middle class to slower drop into the lower class. (252). Timothy Noah disagrees with Richard Epstein in the regards of income inequality being a good thing. Timothy Noah disagrees with Richard Epstein, because he believes that the tax policies end up making the people worse off.

“One reason to care about inequality is the straightforward matter of living standards. The lions share of the economic growth in America over the past thirty years has gone to a small, wealthy minority…”(Krugman 586).

In Robert Reich documentary “Inequality for All” he makes a compelling discussion about the serious crises that the United States faces due the widening economic gap. He looks to raise awareness of the U.S. economic gap between the rich and poor. According to Reich the widening divide in America is real and growing. Income levels at the middle and labor class is stagnant and are at it’s lowest levels compared to upper class incomes since the beginning of WWII and is growing wider each year. Reich suggests that the economy runs more smoothly when the middle class has jobs with fair wages, when unions are strong, and when middle class workers have some extra money to spend if possible when the government uses the tax policy properly and when it raises the minimum wage regularly to control the income gap between labor and management. In other words Reich argues that economically healthy middle and labor class equality is the foundation of a thriving economy and is necessary to maintaining a sound national infrastructure and educational system within