The Growing Wealth Inequality In South Korea

James Madison once stated inequality of the rich and poor predicament to be “evil” and believed that the government should avoid an “immoderate, and especially unmerited, accumulation of riches” (Johnston, 2016). As one of the founding fathers of our nation, James Madison had a concern about the separation between the rich and the poor. He felt the government should do what it could to avoid the separation, which one can infer that he meant for the government to tax the rich by a greater percentage, thus reducing the financial burden on the poor. A rift has always been present between the rich and the poor throughout history. Depending upon the job, the working class may or may not make enough to support a family. At this point, the

According to Inequality.org, “We equate wealth with ‘net worth,’ the sum total of your assets minus liabilities. Assets can include everything from an owned personal residence and cash in savings accounts to investments in stocks/bonds, real estate, and retirement accounts. Liabilities cover what a household owes: a car loan, credit card balance, student loan, mortgage, or any other bill yet to be paid. In the United States, wealth inequality runs even more pronounced than income inequality” (Wealth). Wealth disparity affects everyone in America. When the top twenty percent of earners in America take over fifty percent of total earnings in any given year, It can be see as very unfair by anyone who is in the middle class and especially the lower class of citizens in the U.S. It is safe to say that both sides of the political world (Republicans and Democrats) are equally worried about how economic inequality will affect their children and future generations. No matter who you ask, rich or poor, and whatever their opinion on the shape of economic distribution in America is, they most likely have a unrealistic sense of the state it is actually in.

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.

Today in America, income and wealth inequality has continued to grow at an unsettling pace. The rich continue to get richer, while the number of people categorized as lower class grows exponentially. As Joseph Stiglitz has explained, many theories that are seen as strongly Republican, such as the trickle-down effect, has caused the rich to take money from the poor, and as a result the lower class grows and the middle class disintegrates. The top 1 percent of America’s households currently holds 30 percent of America’s economy, which is much more than other first-world countries and helps to emphasize the extremity of inequality currently in America today. This increased inequality has in turn caused America to become a much more divided society; those born in poverty typically stay in poverty, with little to no chance of self-improvement due to a lack of education provided in their areas. In contrast, those that are born wealthy typically go to better schools, have better health care, and are all but spoon fed information on how to remain wealthy. These two sides of society almost never cross, and this causes the country to be more divided than ever. In order to limit this inequality, drastic changes must be made, such as large corporations paying their fair share of taxes and giving back to the lower class, and minimum wage should be raised. If everyone in America works together, we can raise social mobility and re-unite what has become an increasingly divided country.

The difference of income and workers conditions has been a timeless conflict present throughout history of the United States. In the past workers were faced with deadly work conditions and around the clock hours for little pay. These unjust conditions dramatically increased during the Industrial Revolutions that the United States experienced in the nineteenth century. The latter period of industrialization produced the organization of the first labor unions in the Country, namely the Knights of Labor established in 1869 and the American Federation of Labor established in 1886. In present day countless unions exist, and are a lot less needed than they were in the early industrial days of the United States (Brinkley, 2012).

In the video, Wealth Inequality in America, there were many things that caught my attention the second time around that i had not understood the first time listening to it. When they had surveyed 5,000 people I was not surprised to see that the ideal for most Americans would be a somewhat even distribution of wealth among the various groups. What I was most shocked about was what most American think about the distribution of wealth is not even close to what the reality has to hold. The fact that lowest 20 - 30 percent don't even register as sharing in the wealth of America as they are behind the poverty line. They are living of “pocket change”. The top 1 percent didn't even shock me as much as how the middle class did.

These financial assests include the values of homes, automobiles, businesses, savings and investments. The reason I have decided to investigate and address this issue is because it’s one that constantly flies under the radar. Not many people are aware of the gap bwtween the rich and the poor, and so by writing this, I hope to shopw that we are not as equal as we think. The main areas to be explored in my article are the gilded age, the continuingly large gap between the poor and

The crowd began filing into Sister Jean’s soup kitchen on Pacific Ave. in Atlantic City, N.J. well before lunch was to be served, while directly across the street, people with money to burn strolled into Donald Trump’s massive and garish Taj Mahal casino.

Wealth inequality is a controversial topic because money distribution in America doesn’t ‘seem right. The upper class possess most of the wealth in America and the bottom don’t nearly get as much.

The number of children who are living in poverty have decreased for the first time in almost ten years. The Census Bureau reported a 0.5 percent decrease of Americans living in poverty from 2012 to 2013. Poverty is among the country’s contemporary social problems in the Twenty-First Century. According to the Census Bureau, 45.3 million people were categorized as living in poverty in 2013. To address contemporary social problems like poverty, one must take an in depth look at the reasons why there are so many people dealing with poverty and the challenges that arise from trying to escape it.

“Growing Apart: The Evolution of Income vs. Wealth Inequality” written by Michael Cragg and Rand Ghayad is an article about how wealth distribution in America has dramatically changed within the last three decades and how it has become one of the most political and economic trends in this nation. The main priority of the article is that it talked about how the wealth and financial statues in the United States has favored in the upper class and has opposed the middle and lower class within the last three decades. The first subdivision talked about how income inequality and wealth inequality are both different and how wealth inequality has a bigger negativity on the United States economic growth. The second subdivision talked about how if the

In the film Stray Bullet (1960), the film portrays the struggling economic conditions after the Korean War. Chilsu and Mansu (1988), portrays the struggling economic conditions of working class men in South Korea during the 80’s. Even though these two films highlight the economic conditions of different time periods, it shares a coherent theme of social marginalization. Social marginalization refers to a group of people who are socially excluded and experience inequalities in the distribution of resource and power. In Stray Bullet and Chilsu and Mansu, both films portrayed the social marginalization of those individuals that were in a lower socio-economic class. This paper will provide an analysis on the social marginalization that was portrayed in Stray Bullet and Chilsu and Mansu.

This study considers the conditions of income, wealth and poverty in the United States of America. Income got a better distribution during the 70s but the level of economic growth decreased aggravating the unequal distribution of income (Stone, et al). However, wealth enclosed an inequality of distribution in the United States. It is referred to the unequal distribution of assets among residents of the United States. Also wealth is associated to the values of homes, automobiles, personal valuables, businesses, savings, and investments. In this context, statistics of poverty indicate people living at the economic adversity without satisfying their basic necessities. In mention by the article named “Measuring Poverty (A New Approach),” the statistical data of poverty is published by the U.S. government being a topic of importance and political sensitivity.

At the end of World War II, Korea was a poor former agricultural colony of Japan. But the rapid growth of Korea’s industrial economy has been remarkable. The economy of South Korea is now the third-largest in Asia and the 13th largest in the world by GDP as of 2007. To trace back the economic development of South Korea, the former president Park Chung-Hee played a pivotal role, and was credited for shifting its focus to export-oriented favoring a few large conglomerates. Unlike his predecessors, Park showed a strong commitment to economic development, believing good economic performance as a primary means for enhancing his political legitimacy. Under the President Park Chung-Hee’s era, the government played a dominating role in a