The Mega Rich In The United States

the Europeans; the middle class as we know it today. New basic rights were created:

During the medieval times Kings had absolute power and the Catholic Church made sure God help the King retain this power. During this time feudalism was the structure that shaped society. In the feudalism structure the people that work the land the poor got cero power and live at the mercy of the barons. Barons where the owners of the land that people where let to work and make really low amounts of money while the baron sells and exchange the goods produced by the land and makes a fortune. At the end of the day the land belongs to the king and the king taxes the barons and collects money from all the land making him very, very wealthy and powerful.

(Doc. E) Throughout this timer period corporations were able to undermine and exploit the political power of the government.

Life in the high middle ages, between 1000 and 1300 A.D., had two kinds of communities, manorial villages and towns. The major difference in these two distinct types of communities was the freedom and rights of the people. In the manorial villages you had lords who owned large portions of land. The vassals who entered into a military obligation with the lords, in exchange for land and protection. Finally, serfs who were a class of people that worked their lord’s land as half slave and half freeman. Vassals were more of an employee and the serfs were little more than a slave because they were bound to the lord’s land. The serfs could not leave or do anything without the lord’s permission and most of the time they had to pay fees to be granted the permissions they requested. In contrast the townspeople elected their officials, had freedom to choose a careers, they move about where they liked, and could acquire training and schooling. Townspeople were in fact free and not absolutely controlled by a lord. As for the manorial villages, the lords had all the power and had absolute control over all the actions and work of the vassals and serfs.

There was an obvious unequal distribution of wealth in America. The owners of big businesses held the majority of wealth in the country. Due to corporations being protected like people under the 14th amendment and the laissez faire system, businesses could grow and become monopolies in the industry. Labor leader George McNeill explains how a president of a big business rules over the nation. “He can fix the price of freights, and thus command the food and fuel-supplies of the nation.” (document b) A big business functions as a monopoly by crushing competition with lower prices that small companies can not compete with. George Rice says “ the Standard Oil Company was offering the same quality of oil at much lower prices than I could do - from one to three cents a gallon less than I could possibly sell it for.” (document h) Companies like Standard Oil Company could charge less because of their ability to own every part of the means of production and use trusts, holding companies, and pools to their

The corporations are as such becoming more and more powerful and they support the demise of

 Nobles saw the danger in the future, so they distributed land of the wealthy to the poor and it gave Assembly power to pass laws and elect gov’t officials

It was also because they were needed by everyone and people did whatever the serfs wanted because they needed them. Serfs soon gained more rights and were treated like everyone else in the society. They were no longer poor people who were tied to their master’s land. Serfs started to go to the kings and dukes and bargained with them about better working conditions for themselves. This demand for higher wages and better working conditions ended serfdom. Serfdom was just that serfs were tied to the land that they worked

the middle class to assure continuation of the system that kept the rich, wealthy. You

The vast wealth inequality in America (and the rest of the world) has been cited as a problem by Obama in many of his State Of The Union address, the Chairwoman of the Federal Reserve Janet Yellen, and many other liberal politicians and economists. Their talk about the problem of how the “1%” help perpetuate the wealth inequality has brought this issue to the forefront of society. In America, many citizens believe firmly in the idea of equality. The fact that some people have more money than they could ever spend, while others live in poverty on the streets conflicts with that value of equality. The most famous reaction to this rampant inequality was the Occupy Wall Street movement that started in 2011. Tens of thousands of people camped out next to Wall Street offices in New York and several other financial centers across the nation to protest the inequality between the 1% and the other 99%. This infamous movement gained media attention as the vocal protesters wanted to make it known that the wealth divide is unacceptable and politicians must rectify the situation. One important policy tool the United States has implemented to combat wealth inequality is a progressive tax. This means that people with more income are taxed at a higher rate than those with lower income. However this tax system has many loopholes in the United States, and the wealthiest individuals are routinely able to avoid being taxed at a higher rate by distributing their wealth in bank accounts

Globalization has been a main culprit of wealth inequality in the United States for many years. Many economists believe that globalization was meant to do the exact opposite of what it is. In theory, globalization should makes goods more easily accessible and stable out our governments, but why isn’t it? After doing some research on the topic I have concluded this. Standards of living in countries, most notably poor countries, should have been raised by globalization, but only certain countries are able to reap the rewards while others suffer. It is fact that there is a positive correlation between inequality in incomes and the production outsourcing processes. The outsourcing causes inequality between skilled workers and the others that are

In political elections the people who vote are people who make more money and have a higher education. In 2010 midterm elections 59% of voters made $100,000 dollars or above the to other 43% made less than $50,000 dollars. Many of the voters that made more money had gone to college and had degrees. The voter who made less money had only graduated high school or did not graduate high school. The people who went to college had learned more about politics and had more confidence in their ability to vote and make a difference. Wealthier americans being the main group voting can lead to the wealthier people can have a larger control over the politics.

“Who is the richest American ever?”When asked this question, the name that most often come to mind is Bill Gates but the actual American to become the richest is also the most two-sided businessman: Andrew Carnegie, hero or villain?. In order to answer that question we have to know what the words "hero” and "villain” actually mean. According to Webster Dictionary, a hero is a “person, especially a man admired for courage, nobility, or exploits, especially in war,” and "the central figure in any important event or period, honored for outstanding qualities.” or basically a role model who does good for a cause and has good morals while a villain is described as "someone or something regarded as the cause of a problem, difficulty, injustice,

The feudal system of the time operated on the premise of peasants or serfs, and thanes, or lords. The lords owned the land, and the peasants worked on it. In turn, they received the protection

The economic system of this era is termed feudalism. Feudalism is defined by conditioned holding of land by lords on some kind of service-tenure to the monarch. The lords were a noble class who supplied military service and council to the monarch. The lords' social status was determined by their land holdings. The lords' estates were farmed by compulsory labor, known as serfs. The lords maintained a great deal of control over the serfs. They dictated what, where and when to plant. They also operated as a judiciary force over the serfs (Hilton, pp. 34-36).