The Inequality And Economic Growth

The obvious questions to this position are at what income levels should taxes begin to increase? Also, how much should their taxes increase? We know that high tax rates can be detrimental to an economy, largely due to the deadweight loss that the taxes impose on the markets. Combine this with the fact that the government has proven to be inefficient with the tax revenue it currently has at its disposal, and it is hard to find a suitable argument for why taxes should be increased on the wealthiest

Global discourse around the issue of growing inequality and specifically inequality of opportunity has come to the fore in recent years driven by violent public action witnessed in the spring of 2011. A little southern town in Tunisia known as Sidi Bouzoid in December 2010 took global centre stage in the push for economic emancipation. Mohamed Bouazizi, a fruit vendor vented his frustration with the local corrupt municipality by setting himself ablaze which inadvertently sparked a series of protests across the Arab world. Enter the ‘Arab Spring’ led by disenfranchised youth. Researchers in attempts to diagnose the inspiration for the ensuing revolutions hypothesised stark inequality between economic and political elites and the larger population, as the fuel behind the flame.

Income inequality is increasingly becoming a significant concern for many countries around the world. The income difference between the highly-educated, skilled, wealthy class and the poor, low to mid-skilled workers is growing larger and larger. In fact, the incomes of the rich are increasing significantly, while the low skilled workers’ incomes have been declining (The Economist, “Wealth Without Workers”). According to The Economist, real median wages have been decreasing since 2000 in half of the member countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). In the United States, there was a 4% increase from 1980 to 2012 in the share of national income that was distributed to the top 0.01% (The Economist, “True Progressivism”). Canada is facing a similar problem of rising inequality.

Inequality is not favorable in society. There is inequality in many aspects of our society, such as race, and gender. The main inequality we look at is income inequality in the United States. The one percent of the population control a vast majority of the United States currency. The Gini coefficient has been increasing ever since the Industrial Revolution, a period where education, manufacturing, and economics has shown growth. However, income inequality has increased in the Industrial Revolution. There are many events, and causes that have led to the rise of income equality in the United States.

Income inequality has been a major concern around the world, and it mainly links to how economic metrics are distributed among individuals in a country. Economists generally categorise these metrics in wealth, income and consumption. Wilkinson and Picket (2009) showed in their studies that inequality has drawbacks that lead to social problems. This is because income inequality and wealth concentration can hinder or delay long term growth. In 2011, International Monetary Fund economists showed that less income inequality increased the duration of countries’ economic growth spells more than free trade, low government corruption, foreign investment or low foreign debt (Berg and Ostry, 2011).

In America, most people are trying to get the government to raise the taxes on the rich, but why doesn’t the government raise the taxes on everyone? It is not fair at all to raise the taxes on the rich just because of how fortunate they are. If the government taxed everyone a little more and also made the poor pay their taxes, our nation would be in the same spot as if we made the rich pay a higher tax. This way is more equal and in today’s world we need to be as equal as possible so we can stay united as a country. The only thing that could go wrong with this plan is if the Americans who take advantage of the government’s money keep living this lifestyle. If these Americans would keep taking advantage of the government it would make all taxpayers

In-depth research on inequality highlights the problematic reality that the average American employee has not seen increases in wage benefits from the U.S.'s productivity gains much like top income earners have. Rising inequality in the United States has been noted as the growing divergence between growing productivity and the flattening of average wages since the late 1970s (Citation). The average worker's compensation only grew by 8% from 1979 to 2009 despite an 80% increase in productivity (Sylla). Meanwhile, wages for top percent of income earners have been growing at a disproportionally higher rate than productivity. C.E.O.s from big companies went from earning about twenty times more than their average employee in 1965, to earning about

In “Inequality Has Been Going on Forever… but That Doesn’t Mean It’s Inevitable” by David Leonhardt, he responds to the issue of income inequality between the wealthy and the poor. He starts out with explaining that rising income inequality has been going on for so long that it is starting to look inevitable. Leonhardt then states that Thomas Piketty had wrote that income inequality has been a historical norm. Piketty also writes that the inequality has risen all throughout modern history, with some exceptions including wars and depressions. Leonhardt then begins to explain that even though something may seem natural or likely, it doesn’t mean something is inevitable. Leonhardt then states that the course of income inequality can be changed. He tells that along with wars and depressions, education can disrupt income inequality. I agree with David Leonhardt that income inequality is not an inevitability, and it is something that can be changed.

While those making near the median income of $51,939 per year fall into the 25% tax bracket, taxpayers making over $413,200 per year pay 39.6% of their income to the government. Though heavily taxing the wealthy may seem to offer a solution to the ongoing economic woes, it has quite the opposite effect. For instance, many of the citizens who have a yearly income of over $413,200 own small and medium-sized businesses, which comprise a crucial part of our nation's economy. Because these private business owners are burdened by such high tax rates, they often have to pay their employees less and refrain from creating new jobs. Even more importantly, progressive taxation undermines the very fundamentals upon which the United States of America was founded by attempting to redistribute wealth through socialism. Our current tax system effectively strips individuals of their incentive to pursue entrepreneurship and positive economic development. In his first inaugural address, Thomas Jefferson stated, “A wise and frugal government… shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.” I am utterly disgusted at the way our government has blatantly disregarded the tenets of

For many years wealth and income inequalities in America have progressively gotten worse. The recession in 2007 did not help to reduce the gap. Wealth is determined by everything a person owns and income is determined by how much a person makes at their job. The better job a person has the more income they have and this increases their overall wealth. Wealth and income inequality can be reduced by lowering the cost of higher education, implementing a progressive tax, working with one another to end the stigma of the color of ones skin, and by putting an end to the gender wage gap.

According to the OECD, the term inequality in the opposite of equity can be defined as evenness

Before delving into the topic at hand, a look at the current and projected tax system will help one understand the predicament of taxing the upper class. According to Bardes, Schmidt, and Shelley, in the textbook American Government and Politics Today: Brief Edition, Americans pay a variety of federal, state, and local taxes, which are all assessed on most sources of income, sales and land. Bardes et al, made their agenda clear by pointing out that “the wealthy receive a much greater share of their income from these sources (capital gains, rents, royalties, interests, dividends, or profits from business), than others do (315).” But what is considered wealthy? In the article, Who gets to be “Rich”, Jordan Weissmann reported that a household income of around $113,000 lands one at the top 10% of income earners, while

Rich households have been paying too much in taxes these past years. “Earners in the top 1% pay about 43% of their incomes in tax. [While] people in the middle quintile pay 25%. [And] the poorest fifth pays 13%” (Barro). And yet some politicians, like Donald Trump, think the solution to resolving our country’s debt is by taxing the top percent more. In reality, the United States should have a flat tax rate due to the fact that it is the fairest plan and the hard work pertained by the top percent should be valued.

In my opinion education is the best tool to fight income inequality. I think that income inequality is a major problem but it is like anything else it can be mixed. If people really wanted to solve their financial problems they would attend school and to open doors for better opportunities and not settle for less in this case minimum wage. I also believe the government is doing something about it. I assist those in need.

What do you think would happen if the rich paid more taxes? Would there be a better economy or would it be worst, maybe even stay the same. Increasing the taxes would help out our economy in a few ways. one way that it would help out our economy is that not only would there be less of a concentration of profit at the top of our social ladder there would be more revenue for the funding of civil union jobs. Also not to mention causing the bigger corporations to have to pay more so they would be unable to escape with the majority of the illegal activity they do today. Lastly if the government were to crack down on offshoring it would help with collecting taxes and the money would return to the people and back into circulation for our economy. Here are some reasons why the rich should pay higher taxes.